ncgraham's reading nook

^^ Because alliteration is awesome, and I had to fit something literary in the title.


(this is not me, nor is it my reading nook, but I think it's quite lovely)

Welcome to one and all, to friends old and new. I'm new to Club Read this year. (And starting rather late, I know.) Last year I took part in the 50 Book Challenge, but didn't meet my goal and feel like the extra pressure to make it might distract from my schoolwork this year. But I had a great time with that: I hope that everyone who posted there will drop by here, and that I make new friends here at Club Read as well. The old thread is available at http://www.librarything.com/topic/75065. I'm still finishing up over there, catching up on a few final reviews and such, but I decided I couldn't put off opening this thread up any longer.

As in everything, I come with baggage. I am reading The Lord of the Rings and Going Places With God, both of which I should have finished long ago, as well as The Magician's Nephew, which I am reading aloud to my little sister.

I think I have fairly wide reading tastes (my mother disagrees, but she's good at doing that :p), so if the current fantasy/genre binge that I'm going on scares you, don't run away. All are welcome.

Wow! Let me be the first! Welcome, welcome, welcome! You know that I'm going to try LotR this year, so looks like we'll have much to talk about.

Woohoo! Welcome to the fold. We're glad you're here.

You read way more than I did in my undergrad years. I'm impressed.

There will be rain in Northumberland to-morrow.

Yay, Teresa! I'm so glad that you found me (I've starred and been following your thread, by the way), and that you're going to read LotR. Rest assured that the length my reread has taken in no way reflects any dislike I might have for it. In fact, when I pick it up and start to get into it again, I always find that I love it as much as ever.

I probably read way too much for being an undergrad, Meddy.

And now, without further ado, my first reads of the year:

1. Winter Rose by Patricia McKillip



A lovely way to start the year. McKillip has been a new and exciting part of my reading diet since the summer before last, and this may be one of her best. I think that of all current fantasy authors, she has the best understanding of the power of language. Everything she writes is so dreamily beautiful, and her characters are great. This one is a bit difficult and obscure, so I wouldn't recommend it for a starting point for McKillip newbies, and for me the first half was better than the second. Still, brilliant. Full review at http://www.librarything.com/work/26799/reviews/54460598.

2. Solstice Wood by Patricia McKillip



This modern-day sequel to Winter Rose is the proverbial other side of the coin. It's much more straightforward, but it also lacks its predecessor's beautiful, dreamy writing and air of danger. This one is just too placid and friendly for my tastes, especially considering that it's supposed to follow up a far better novel. I feel a little cheated, to tell the truth. And the sexual content, while not incredibly offensive, was unnecessary. A lesser McKillip, I'd say, and only worthwhile for her amazing exploration in one chapter of a widow's grief. More thoughts at http://www.librarything.com/work/133896/reviews/54566196.

3. Cotillion by Georgette Heyer



This book (and author!) was recommended to me by ChocolateMuse and wisewoman. Thanks to both of you—I really enjoyed it! A fun, sparkling read. Great characters (I read Mr. Penicuick with Lionel Barrymore in mind, and Freddy's exclamations of "Dash it, Kit!" have randomly become part of my vocabulary), and a surprising moral awareness. More than "just" a Regency romance, Cotillion will prompt me to seek out some of the author's work. I posted a full review here: http://www.librarything.com/work/18596/reviews/54831493. Amy, Rena, do you think it's too spoilery?

Next up, once I finish LotR, is Bel Canto by Ann Patchett.

Meddy, Meddy, Meddy... good for the crops!

That was fun.

Hearty welcomes to you, ncgraham. Good to see you here.

Oh dear, you two are really making me want to read some Wodehouse again. Maybe I'll find one of his books at the uber-sized several-times-a-year amazing library booksale I'm going to tomorrow! Unfortunately the only one I've ever come across was Leave it to Psmith, which you know I enjoyed. I've looked in Half Price Books as well, but couldn't figure out what section they'd be in. I should ask one of the shelvers, but I always wind up with the bumbling, ignorant ones. (As in, the ones who think Zen and the Art of Motorcyle Maintenance would be in the mechanics section. Oh yes.)

/end rant

2> Have you never read The Lord of the Rings?

Oh my, it's been 25 years since I read it myself at the age of 15 in Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks on my summer vacation with the parents (1984) but it's easily one of my most memorable and rewarding reads ever. Haven't read it since (in its entirety) as I'm afraid my cynicism of old age would only ultimately ruin LotR for me. The movies are spectacular! Though I do think they spent an inordinate amount of time in Helm's Deep.

>7 absurdeist: I know, it's a major failing, right? I've never been interested in it until now. I wasn't tempted until I read some words that Amy wrote about it. My time for it may have passed, but I'd still like to give it a try.

Nathan, terrific review of Cotillion! Thumbs, thumbs, thumbs!

Rena: :)

Nathan, I'd be charitable and offer to send you some Wodehouse... if I didn't want to keep all of mine! I found just a few Wodehouse works in various Half Price bookstores when I was in Texas. I found one in the trade paperback/hardcover fiction section, and two in the mass market paperback fiction section.

I have a really beat-up old copy of Stiff Upper Lip, Jeeves that I might be induced to part with...

I'm so glad you finally got in here, Nathan! I've just been enjoying your reviews. You've made me decide Winter Rose (and probably Solstice Wood) will be my next McKillips. I started Solstice Wood awhile ago but stopped when I realized it was a sequel of sorts to Winter Rose (which I didn't own at the time).

I'm looking forward to your thoughts on Bel Canto. You may enjoy it a bit more than I did because of your opera expertise. I wonder what you'll make of the ending...

Thanks Amy!

I'll really be interested to hear your thoughts on Solstice Wood, especially as other McKillip fans seem to like it (though not this fellow, with whom I am in perfect agreement: http://museofire.blogspot.com/2007/03/more-solstice-less-wood.html). You won't like the "mature" content, which, while not too prevalent, is certainly not as clean as most of her other books. Everything about the book seemed so ... unsubtle after Winter Rose.

I just put a Wodehouse novel up as a Member Giveaway, because I accidentally ended up with two copies. Maybe I should have checked to see if anybody here wanted it first!

Yes, I remember some of the "content" appearing in the first few pages that I did read, and being put off by it. McKillip is always at her best when she leaves that stuff out.

I have some nitpicky grammatical edits on your latest slew of reviews, Nathan. I'll leave you another comment on them.

I love nitpicky grammatical edits!

Thanks for popping in, bragan. No worries about not checking here first—I've requested it, and maybe my luck will hold. Otherwise, I'm sure whoever else gets it will enjoy it, and that I'll find my own copy eventually. :D Do drop by again!

The booksale I went to this morning didn't have the best selection ever, but I did manage to find a few things:

- Homecoming by Cynthia Voight (it won the Newbery, after all, and I already had the sequel)
- Clutch of Constables by Ngaio Marsh (I love the cover on this copy!)
- O Pioneers! by Willa Cather (ditto)
- Queen of the Summer Stars by Persia Woolley (a sequel, which I generally try to avoid buy, but I think the library has the first book, and as a rule I'll pick up anything Arthurian)
- Sherlock Holmes: A Baker's Street Dozen (an audio drama with 12 stories, starring Sir John Gielgud as the classic sleuth, Sir Ralph Richardson as Watson, and Orson Welles as Moriarty—this was by far the most exciting thing I found at the sale)
- The Tyranny of the Night by Glen Cook (for a friend, who told me to buy him a book at the sale; this looked like something he might enjoy)

Well, good luck, anyway!

Big news - I finally finished The Lord of the Rings! Those of you who were around my 2009 thread know how long I've been at it, and I really wanted to finish it up before I got back to school to start another semester. So I sped through the last Book, but oddly I was still able to catch most everything and my enjoyment of it wasn't lessened at all; in fact, I think I liked it more. Maybe I just needed more willpower while reading, or something like that. While home, my sister and I also finished The Magician's Nephew; we'll read The Last Battle next time I'm home. For now, I've moved on to Bel Canto.

I started three of my four literature classes today, including Renaissance Literature, Readings in Spanish II, and Jane Austen and the Popular Imagination. The latter, however, is the only one I'll be tracking in this thread, as it is the only one with complete standalone texts. Because of the nature of the course, I will be counting the books as part of my reading this year and also write reviews for them. (I may also do that for my Reading, Eating, and Thinking course, but haven't decided yet.) Along with the six major novels, we'll be reading Lady Susan*, The Watsons, Sanditon, Stella Gibbons' Cold Comfort Farm, Helen Fielding's Bridget Jones's Diary, and Karen Joy Fowler's The Jane Austen Book Club. NOT excited about those last two. I will also be reading her later letters for a paper/presentation I'll be doing.

Enough babbling from me. Just figured an update was in order.

Congrats on finishing LOTR! I'll be interested in your thoughts on Bel Canto. I read it just after it came out, expecting I'd love it, but I didn't end up getting on with it very well, and I've forgotten just about everything about it now. Maybe it was just my mood at the time.

Looking forward to your Austen thoughts--and Cold Comfort Farm, yay! One of my top 3 funniest novels.

There's a lot of terrific books by Patricia McKillip - but she's MUCH stronger with her dreamy, exquisite medievalesqe (sic) fantasies than in modern settings. the alphabet of thorn, the tower at stony wood, and the amazing Ombria in Shadow are probably my favorites. Her early SF/fantasy books are kindof weak (the Hed & Eld books).

See, I love The Riddle-Master of Hed, etc., and would rank The Forgotten Beasts of Eld fairly high too. Her prose has matured some with time, but even from the beginning it was beautiful and far superior to those of most fantasy writers. Take the closing chapters of Harpist in the Wind, for instance—that's some powerful stuff. It's grander and more mythic than her later work, "higher" fantasy as well as more straightforward; I think both it and her newer works have their merits. I love everything from Eld to Sealey Head. I do feel, however, that in certain of the new novels she takes the dreaminess too far, to the point that it is at times difficult to decipher the plot. I had that problem with The Tower at Stony Wood, but then again, it was my first McKillip and I probably wasn't ready for it. I would love to come back to it someday.

Of course, I liked Alphabet of Thorn and Ombria very much as well. :)

#17 - Hope you'll be watching Clueless as well!

I am! Along with Becoming Jane, the Rozema MP, the Mormon P&P, the Japanese S&S, and the '95 Persuasion. I've only seen the latter; I look forward to trying things in this class I might not have otherwise.

Japanese S&S sounds very intriguing. As do the others! Do come back and tell us all about them...

and i'm so glad you liked LoTR. On a couple of the groups i lurk on here, it seems far too hip to dismiss Tolkien as high fantasy fluff. bah.

Looking through our shared books - and looking at what i have that you might enjoy alot - maybe take a look at the orphan's tales, esp. the first volume, In the Night Garden by Catherynne Valente - there are quite a few accurate reviews here on LT. mine was shamefully brief, though i gave it 5 stars:
"While Valente respects and gives nods to the classics in fantasy, magical realism, metafictions, et al...The concepts, linkages and , indeed, lack of sentimentality while at the same time being psychologically engrossing and moving are really something new under the readers sun. Slightly better than the followup book in the sequence, but both get 5 stars"

Thanks for the recommendation! I'll look into it. And yes, LotR is an old favorite; I was worried that my reread would suffer from my advanced years and the fact that I've gotten used to the movie versions, but it was all hogwash. Definitely one of my top five reads ever.

I'll definitely report on our viewings in the JA class as well, wandering_star: have no fear about that!

A bit of an update: I am in fact not really reading Bel Canto at the moment, having put it on the back-burner when I decided it was too heavy for what I wanted right now. Instead I started Georgette Heyer's Lady of Quality, which is light and entertaining but far from being as good as Cotillion. Indeed, I must admit that I find it a little cliche. It just doesn't draw you in the way her other book did, the characters aren't as engaging, and I don't really feel she's saying anything new about social relations, as she did in Cotillion. Also, this seems to be one of those books where the title seems to be repeated in dialogue ad nauseum, just to make sure the reader isn't stupid. *headdesk*

Meanwhile I'm making my way through Lady Susan/The Watsons/Sanditon for my JA class, and am about to start Dostoyevsky's Notes from the Underground. I foresee some review-writing happening this weekend.

Lady of Quality is the Heyer I started first, that turned me off her books for awhile. I just couldn't understand how so many people could like Heyer if all her books were like that. It wasn't HORRID, just rather average. I did think the characters were a bit too modern. I'm glad I eventually bumped into ChocolateMuse and asked her which Heyer she would recommend... she mentioned Cotillion, among others, and the rest is history :)

Isn't Lady Susan fun? Telling the story (at least partly) in the voice of the "villain" was kind of innovative back then, wasn't it?

And speaking of Austen, I'm currently rereading Persuasion. It is simply wonderful.

Oooh, Notes from the Underground! Have you read C&P or any other Dosteovsky? I haven't, I hasten to add, but I plan to do so this year, and have decided that it's probably best to start with C&P, though Underground looks, um, well, shorter?

Maybe I should ask Murr's advice, but if you have a rec of where to start, please tell me!

As I mention on your profile page, Lady of Quality is a very underwhelming book. Go for Friday's Child instead!

I haven't seen this long-awaited LoTR review yet, have I missed it?

Amy: Isn't Lady Susan fun? Telling the story (at least partly) in the voice of the "villain" was kind of innovative back then, wasn't it?

Kind of innovative, yes. And yet the book hearkens back to the conventions of the day in certain ways as well—why, the very form of the epistolary novel was a profoundly eighteenth century concept. LS is one of those rare works that feels both very old and very new. It's far from perfect, but I found it profoundly more satisfying than either of the fragments, although I thought Sir Edward's ambition to be a seductive villain in Sanditon was hilarious!

And speaking of Austen, I'm currently rereading Persuasion. It is simply wonderful.

Mmm, yes. I am very much looking forward to rereading that one for class. And I remembered your experience with Lady of Quality...but more on that below.

Rena: This will be my first Dostoevsky. I tried Crime and Punishment when I was about fifteen, and though I enjoyed what I read, I decided that I wasn't yet ready for it. Notes from Underground appears to be a fairly good starting point, not only because of its length, but also because it was the first great work of the author's major period, according to my introduction. However, I suspect C&P is the stronger of the two when it comes to plot. You had probably best ask Murr.

Lady of Quality is a very underwhelming book. Go for Friday's Child instead!

It definitely wasn't my first choice for my next Heyer, but when I'm away at school I'm pretty much dependent upon my personal collection of books, and this was the only one I was able to pick up used, aside from Royal Escape. Never fear, I'll pick a more suitable follow-up when I return home to my public library system. What's your pick from this stash: http://encore.cityofdenton.com/iii/encore/search/C|Sgeorgette+heyer|Orightresult... I was thinking either of A Civil Contract or These Old Shades/Devil's Cub, but I'm open to anything. A pity they don't have Friday's Child.

I haven't seen this long-awaited LoTR review yet, have I missed it?

Not yet you haven't! It's coming, I promise. I was working on it today, but schoolwork interfered. Look for it this weekend, if not earlier.

28 -
I haven't read any Dostoevsky other than C and P but it's actually a really easy read. Just start it and you'll read right through it.

I wouldn't start out with A Civil Contract or Royal Escape, either one. I really love These Old Shades/Devil's Cub, but others find Leonie too precious. I love The Masqueraders, The Unknown Ajax, The Toll-Gate, and The Grand Sophy in particular, so recommend all of those.

ETA oh, yes, Cotillion is one of my very favorites, definitely!!!

I'd not go for A Civil Contract because it's entirely different from your average Heyer. I actually really like it, but it's less fluffy than Heyer usually is, and not her usual style. I'd recommend The Convenient Marriage or maybe The Unknown Ajax; or stick with These Old Shades/Devil's Cub. Failing all those, The Nonesuch isn't bad. Whatever you go with, keep me posted!

#30 - thanks lilisin, I'll stick with my original plan to start with C&P I think.

ETA: I had this sitting unposted for hours - good thing ronincats agrees with me!

Yeah, A Civil Contract looked, to be concise, different-but-good. I may read a few more "normal" Heyers before that, but it's definitely still on the list. These Old Shades may be my next.

Oh, and Rena, if you choose to read Notes from the Underground, be aware that much of it is monologue; I think the first part consists entirely of one character's ranting. Like I said, Crime and Punishment would probably be stronger when it comes to plot and narrative.

I shouldn't allow this thread to lag so. Anyway, here, at long last, is a bit of an update in terms of what I've been reading recently, with several reviews included. A lot of fantasy and Regency romance this January, apparently....

4. The Magician’s Nephew by C. S. Lewis



Charming, beautiful, and nostalgic, like all of the Chronicles. This one's an old favorite, and I really have nothing to say aside from what I put in my review: http://www.librarything.com/review/54978486 I feel like such a broken record when it comes to these books, but really, they're that good.

5. The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien



Finally - my Big Read of 2009 finished, here in 2010! For me, this will always be one of the Very Great Books, not only because of its literary qualities and importance for the fantasy genre, but because my dad read it aloud to me (the last time we observed that custom) during my adolescence, and it opened up for me a new, much more grown-up literary world. I haven't finished my review of it yet, finding the writing, editing, and organizing is taking quite some time—but that's understandable, given its source material. :D It should be up within the next couple of days.

6. Lady Susan, The Watsons, and Sanditon by Jane Austen



My first read for this semester's Jane Austen class, and the only one of hers that is going to be new to me. I enjoyed all three selections but probably liked Lady Susan best of all, probably because it is actually complete, but they were all of them good, although not quite up to the standards of her major works. I'm sort of interested in reading "completed" versions of The Watsons and Sanditon now, although I worry they'll fudge up Austen's stories. Full review of the stories at http://www.librarything.com/review/55148200

7. Lady of Quality by Georgette Heyer



Eh. Meh. I won't say I wasn't suitably warned (you were right again, Amy and Rena) but really I was hoping I would like it "better then reportingly" (to quote Shakespeare). It is not particularly awful, but there is nothing about it that is particularly good either. As I said in my review (http://www.librarything.com/review/54585977), this is a strictly by-the-numbers Regency romance.

In other news, I'm dropping Bel Canto less than a chapter in. Just not in the mood for it at the moment. Not sure what my next pleasure read will be—hopefully something better than this last Heyer.

Your reviews just keep getting better and better, Nathan. Bravo! I especially like the review of Austen's minor works; I haven't read them all but agreed with you on the ones I had (Sanditon and Lady Susan).

Not to put any pressure on you, but I'm looking forward to your LOTR review :)

It's nice to know that my early assessment of Lady of Quality is borne out by the rest of the novel. I will probably read it eventually, but it's low on the Heyer list. Too bad. It's hard on authors that we love, to produce nothing but their absolute best every time. We come to them with such high expectations.

Indeed.—And thank you for the very high compliment :)

I finished Northanger Abbey for my Austen class the other night and will probably review it at the same time as The Lord of the Ring. (When I'll get to Phantom remains a mystery.) Oh, and I just remembered that I promised to share my thoughts on my Austen class viewings with all of you as well. So, I watched Becoming Jane for the first time last week ... and didn't particularly like it. But I didn't hate it either, which is what I was expecting to do. It is beautifully shot, has a very nice soundtrack—Julian Jerrold is a composer to look out for, I tell you—and quite a fine cast. James Cromwell and Maggie Smith are magnificent as always, and I was surprisingly unbothered by Anne Hathaway's accent. But I was generally unimpressed by both the screenplay and the direction. This is a dreamy, wandering sort of movie that's not at all faithful to the tone of Austen's style, which they seem to be trying to mimic, making sure the characters parallel those from Pride and Prejudice. It was hard to keep track of everyone, and the failed elopement was the height of ridiculousness. That simply would never have happened in those days; it was quite improper. And it really didn't add anything to the storyline either. Overall, entertaining, but pure Hollywood cheese nonetheless.

Much more successful as an Austen biopic is Miss Austen Regrets, which I watched on my own later. This is set in Austen's later life and gives us a very different look at not only the way she lived, but also the way she wrote: instead of claiming, as BJ did, that she love and lost and this inspired her to write, MAR instead claims that she never found what her characters did and that it all came out of her imagination; nevertheless she led a happy life, and in the end regrets marriage only as a means of supporting her family. I like this interpretation, and I very much like the way it's presented in the film. The music and cinematography may not be as "polished" as in the Hollywood film, but they're much more than passable, and the acting is simply fantastic: when you have Phyllida Law as Mrs. Austen, Greta Scaachi as Cassandra, and Olivia Williams as Jane herself, you know you have a winner. The last twenty minutes of the film gave me goosebumps, and I was near crying several times. Down to earth, harrowing, and intensely moving, I recommend this to all JA fans.

Wow, that was longer than I planned it to be. I'll shut up now and write book reviews next time I start to gab.

^ Varying opinions on the above warmly welcomed, of course.

Lady of Quality is definitely a weaker Heyer. It is basically a reuse of the plot of Black Sheep but with weaker characters. According to her biography, there were times in her life when Heyer had to put out books for financial reasons, and it generally shows. See my prior post for my personal favorites.

I'm with you in that I still love McKillip's riddle-master trilogy and Eld, even though they were among her earliest work. I just finished re-reading the trilogy. Perhaps my favorite of her most recent ones is Od Magic, which you haven't mentioned. How did you like it?

ETA PBS started airing the BBC production of Emma last Sunday--the rest of it is coming up this Sunday. And it looks like Persuasion and Northanger Abbey are coming up this spring as well.

there were times in her life when Heyer had to put out books for financial reasons

Yes, instead of working on her magnum opus, the Lancaster trilogy, no? (Wikipedia, for all of its faults, is quite informative sometimes. :P) Sad and ironic, isn't it?

I haven't read Od Magic yet—my library doesn't have it, and I haven't found it cheap in the used bookstores yet. I definitely plan on reading it, but I'm still working through McKillip's opus, so there's a fair share else ahead of me as well. My favorite of her later works (almost as high in my regard as Riddle-Master) is The Bell at Sealey Head (darned touchstone!), followed probably by Winter Rose. But I've probably said all of this before.

I've seen all of those adaptations before, although the Emma is new to the U.S. My thoughts on it can be found here: http://www.librarything.com/topic/74485 The Persuasion I found fairly dismal, but the Northanger Abbey is fairly good—of course, it doesn't have much competition either.

My reviews of The Lord of the Rings, The Phantom of the Opera, and Northanger Abbey are just going to have to wait. I spent the first half of this week being sociable, and the second is going to be 100% devoted to homework, which is trying to eat me up in this coming week. However, I was able to start George Eliot's Scenes of Clerical Life last night as my newest pleasure read, and I am already in love with it. It's similar in tone to her Silas Marner as well as the first sections of The Mill on the Floss, and while one can see some ways in which she is very much a growing writer here (as in early Austen, there's more authorial intervention here than in the later works), this is an amazing debut work. Her description of a cup of tea with fresh cream in it was mouthwateringly delicious—I was almost convinced that I'd never had a real cup of tea before.

I should also be starting Emma today for my Jane Austen class. This is one I didn't really like when I read it the first time around (probably at the age of 14 or so), and I'm looking forward to revisiting it.

Sounds like you've been busy!

Emma is a book to be read for the minor characters and the narrator's observations. It's a journey through Highbury. The book is way better than all the movies (thought I haven't seen the latest BBC serialisation). Enjoy! Can't wait to see what you think!

I so badly want to finish Les Mis so I can get started on all the other reads I want to do this year, particularly George Eliot.

And Nathan - you do realise that your LoTR review is going to have to be really, majorly, unbelievably good, since we've been wating for it since late last year!

The book is way better than all the movies (thought I haven't seen the latest BBC serialisation).

It's not going to change that, trust me. ;) This morning we were discussing it in my Austen class, and my professor agreed with me that much of it was frightfully modernized and the BBC really didn't do their homework in this instance. Even the posture of the characters, the way they interact with each other on a basic social level, etc., is wrong. It's a pity because it's so pretty and given a better script and a stronger director to hedge her in, Romola Garai could have been a miraculous Emma.

I still think I like the Beckinsale best, but they all have their pluses and minuses, and in the end I do think you're right: the book's probably best, despite my heated relationship with it.

you do realise that your LoTR review is going to have to be really, majorly, unbelievably good, since we've been wating for it since late last year!

Ha, my Phantom review has been pending for just as long, but I don't think anyone really cares about poor Leroux. I should take time out of my day at some point and whip up those reviews, along the two for Austen books. But it's so hard sometimes to talk about old friends like these!

A few quick updates before I fade away for a bit:

- I finished Emma for class (work, stupid touchstone!); thanks for your comments about it being a journey through Highbury, Rena: that really helped me to enjoy it more this time around. There was still a point, however, when it became a bit of a slog. I'm thinking that I've yet to read the book at the ideal pace, as I really meandered through it the first time, devoid of any willpower, whereas this reread was bound up within the requirements of the class reading schedule. That said, I greatly enjoyed this reread, and the book has risen in my affections. I don't quite love it yet, but I very much like it, besides admiring and respecting it. I do think I enjoyed it a smidgen more than my reread of Northanger Abbey, which seems very slight in comparison. There's so much more psychological depth in Emma!

- I should have finished Notes from Underground for another class by now, but I definitely skimmed portions of it and want to go back and reread those, in order to get a better understanding of the novel. At this point I don't feel as though I've read the book, and I certainly am not ready to write a review! That's some heavy stuff there.

- Scenes of Clerical Life has been left by the wayside for the moment, not because I wasn't enjoying it, but simply because I lost my copy! I swear it will turn up in the next couple of days, along with my Bible and that $20 bill.... (I should try the back pocket of my backpack; lost things always seem to find their way in there. Even if I check it for an item one day, it will be bound to appear there the next—quite mysteriously and beyond all my powers of explanation!)

- In view of the above, I've started Drinkwater: A Sobering Tale About A Medieval Knight as a substitute "pleasure" read. (I use this term with a keen sense of irony.) This was a Member Giveaway I got a while back, and now I feel such a knucklehead for requesting it. Despite the fact that the title contains two very bad puns on drinking and sobriety, I somehow missed the fact that it was basically an anti-alcoholism tract, and fancied it to rather be a fun swashbuckler that just happened to have a drunkard as its hero, which sounded pretty entertaining. Blah. Nothing of the sort. Some of the swashbuckler elements are there, but they are so cliche and so badly handled as to make them past enjoyment. Also, there are anachronisms out the wazoo. And Scamfer hasn't the faintest idea of how to punctuate a sentence. If this book were longer, and I weren't waiting for my Eliot to turn back up, I'd drop it now, but as it is I'll probably finish it and write a scathing review. That should be fun.

Wow, what was supposed to be a short update turned into a regular ol' rant at the end there. I must really not like that book ;))

Another post, much shorter this time. (I thought at first people didn't respond because I'm being shunned until I get that LotR review out ... but now I realize it may have been my own epic-sized post! :P )

My currently-reading list continues to proliferate. Just now I found The Castle in the Attic by Elizabeth Winthrop on the Honors Centers alumni-donated, read-and-return bookshelf, and I just couldn't resist picking it up and having a go at it. This was a book I greatly enjoyed during my childhood/youth, but I'm not sure I quite realized until now how much it influenced one of my early attempts at a novel, or how much the ten-year-old me had in common with William. Good stuff, all in all.

I greatly enjoyed your epic-sized post, but I had a report to churn out last night, and am just finishing up work today and so hadn't had a chance yet to say so!

Thanks, ronincats. I think everyone is busy right now. :)

We had Jane Austen movie night #2 this evening: as a close to our reading of Emma, we watched Clueless. Like Becoming Jane, this is a movie I would never have watched on my own, and not one I'm necessarily raring to watch again. I do think I enjoyed it slightly more than BJ, but that's mostly because it could be unabashadly modern without transgressing the social rules of Regency England—and I think the fact that I actually watched it with the group helped too. (I was sick for our first movie night, so I had to borrow the DVD and watch it on my own.) Clueless has a very witty script, and it's enjoyable to go through and spot the coordination between it and the novel. I don't think I would have any interest in it at all if it wasn't based on Emma, but then again, some things that regular viewers might just shrug off are incredibly annoying to someone familiar with the original novel. For instance, there is one scene that's quite similar to the bit in Austen when Harriet Smith is saved from the gypsies by Frank Churchill ... I was all expecting for Cher (Emma) to imagine them falling in love and having a misunderstanding with Tai (Harriet) as a result. And yet it never happened - what a let-down! This is mostly because the Frank Churchill character, Christian, was reinterpreted as a homosexual. And there was no Jane Fairfax. This didn't offend me, but it led to narrative confusion for this Austen fan in the second half of the film. (I kept trying to identify a Jane!) The Mr. Knightley character, Josh, was great—until there was a shot of him in bed with a random woman. That was not to be borne with! The best part of the film was that Wallace Shawn was in it! Vizzini in a teen flick? Inconceivable, I know, but totally true.

Medellia want to discuss Northanger Abbey later. So I update my reading log a bit. (I should probably be better in doing this but I don't like to until I write my reviews, or at least most of them. Emma and The Castle in the Attic are on their way, I promise. And then, someday, Phantom and The Lord of the Rings.)

8. Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen



This was my first reread for Jane Austen class, and while I still enjoyed the book, I didn't find it to be quite as good the second time around, possibly because the academic setting caused me to read it with a more critical eye. Still, I enjoyed it, and my review (http://www.librarything.com/work/14710/reviews/54247313) is mostly laudatory. Even early, somewhat rough Jane Austen is better than the majority of books out there. And in case you all didn't know, Henry Tilney is Da Man: http://www.tilneysandtrapdoors.com/cult/main.html

I re-watched the most recent adaptation last night, and don't think I have anything that I want to go back and change in my review. I have considered trying to collect adaptations of each major Jane Austen novel on DVD, so I may eventually buy it, but it's not a favorite. If only Davies had stuck the tiniest bit closer to the book! And left The Monk out. Eww.

I had thought about watching the older version at some point, but I watched some clips on YouTube and they pretty much scared me away. First off, there's the bizarre Roman baths scene, complete with food trays (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLBkvwydvAA). Then there's the bizarre ending, complete with ridiculously over-the-top and out of character mumbo-jumbo from Tilney (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l36wKqaR1k). And there's a random creepy old French lady who hangs out with the Tilneys. And Isabella acts as though she wandered out of a very bad regional theater production of Clueless.

Wow, maybe I should watch it, so I can continue the vitriol. But now to lunch.

Da Man — LOL! He is great though. And great review! I will say that I did get more of the jokes on my second read of NA, after I had read The Mysteries of Udolpho. It was funny the first time, but when you see precisely where Austen is casting her satirical eye, it becomes that much more hysterical.

I really respect Austen for writing books like NA. I look at myself and I have to be honest — I probably would have been sucked into it all like Catherine. Would my sense of humor have saved me? No idea.

Wow, brilliant review!

Before I thumb it, you might want to change the bit (about halfway down) where you inadvertantly call Eleanor 'Isabella' - twice. Puts a slightly strange aspect on things.

I love what you say about Henry's poking fun and loving those he pokes fun at. And about Isabella's vocab being completely distinctive. And about the novel being all about appearances - part, I think, of her wider satire on society. Catherine just simply does not get the fact that society is all about saying one thing and doing/being another - at least the Isabellethan kind of society, and also 'polite' society - a recurrent theme in Austen. Catherine's innocence sits her entirely outside it to the point where she never realises it's even going on. It's SO well done, I love this novel!

I've never read Pamela - but I think Jane Austen has used the idea of that in Northanger Abbey a little too - how novel reading gave innocent young women a skewed idea of real life... yet Austen defends novel reading and writing throughout.

Awesome review Nathan. You are Da Man too. :)

I fixed that. Thank you, Rena!

Catherine's innocence sits her entirely outside it to the point where she never realises it's even going on

True, though she proves to have good instincts—even if they are filtered through her romantic, Gothic fantasies. For instance, she's right in her assumption that General Tilney is a villain, and she suspects that Isabella and Captain Tilney will become involved before anyone else does. So she's an odd mix of naivete and perception. Like most Austen characters, she's far more complex than one would guess at first.

I'm a little confused by your mention of Pamela—how does it tie in with Northanger Abbey? Is there some reference I missed? It's funny you mentioned that, because I was wondering the other day if there were any references to Richardson's most famous novel in Austen's opus; there are to the lesser-known Clarissa (in Sanditon) and Sir Charles Grandison (NA).

I promise that I will not reread again without the background of Udolpho, Amy! I've meant to read that ever since you began pontificating about it making NA that much funnier in the books thread, but I didn't expect I'd be returning to this Austen novel quite so soon. Ah well, I'm not complaining. Taking this Austen class makes for great assigned reading and great discussions in here!

I'll be reading through Mansfield Park for the next couple of weeks (love, love, love—how did I ever find it dull?) and then switching gears for Cold Comfort Farm. So excited! I read the prologue today, and was just dying over her comparison between journalism and novel-writing. Amy, I think you'll have to forgive me for loving this, because I fully plan to.

I think I was thinking of the wrong book. There's a novel of about Pamela's period where the heroine has been incredibly sheltered all her life and her knowledge of life comes entirely from novels. Every time a man talks to her she thinks he's trying to seduce her.

I just looked up Pamela, and it looks like I did get it wrong. Does anyone know the book I mean? I only have a vague recollection of it - my sister studied it at uni. (Maybe I should just ask her...)

Okay, we'll see about Cold Comfort Farm ;). I do seem to be alone in my gentle dislike for it.

That sounds familiar, Chocolate... hmm. *thinks*

You seem to be in that position with several books, don't you, Amy? (*cough*I Capture the Castle*cough*) I can't think of any instances when I've been in the same circumstance. On the other hand, there have certainly been many times when I have embraced some of the less-beloved classics, such as The Phantom of the Opera or Silas Marner.

Please let us know if you find out what book it is, Rena. It sounds hilarious! A heroine with a reverse Sir Edward Denham (Sanditon) complex? Oh dear.

And now it is fixed, are you going to thumb my "brilliant review"? I don't mean to nag, but you did promise! :P

Maybe Meddy will have time to drop by today—posting on NA in here was partially her suggestion—and perhaps I'll be able to post my Castle in the Attic review later as well. We'll see!

Hi Nathan, I just "thumbsed-up" your review of Northanger Abbey. Frankly, I've always loved NA. Sure it's not as strong as her later novels, but so what? I've always found it delightful and quite witty. The latest adaptation was a bit of a stretch, but did capture the basics, certainly more so than that dreary, laughable 80s version. The producers of that version should be sooooo embarrassed. Of course, I've only seen Youtube clips and the DVD cover art, but that's enough to let me know that they didn't get the joke! Amy didn't like I Capture the Castle? **walks away muttering**

No, Amy didn't.

*runs away to hide :-P*

>56 atimco:, Ah, fair enough.

"I guess the first few chapters gave me the idea that it was going to be something it wasn't, and my expectations were smashed." I had no expectations before reading it and therein may lie the difference. In fact, the book came my way by accident and was read much in the same way. I had never heard of it until then. I wouldn't rave about it, but did enjoy it.

Excellent review of NA, really well done. You gave me a deeper appreciation of the book than I came away with when I read it for the first time last year. You're right: it's not a good starting point for JA. If it had been the first one I'd read I might not have seen what all the Austen fuss was about. Tilney may be Da Man, but you must admit that Catherine is dilly.

I am very much looking forward to reading your thoughts on Mansfield Park.

Brilliant review all thumbed and given a birthday cake. :)

I would like to speak up and say I didn't appreciate Cold Comfort Farm either. *high fives Amy* Lame and laboured, was my (rather harsh) opinion. I didn't read it all though, abandoned it quite quickly. I wonder if I didn't give it enough of a chance.

But humour is such a personal thing. I gave Three Men in a Boat all the chance I could, read half of it once, and then later tried again and read all through. Still can't see what all the fuss is about.

I capture the castle is on my hope-to-read-in-2010 list. I didn't read your review, Amy, because of the spoiler warning.

I will ask my sister about that novel I can't place. I hope I didn't make it up, or dream it.

If you dreamt it up, you ought to write it, Rena!

Woohoo, someone finally agrees with me on Cold Comfort Farm! I do believe you are the first. Ours is a high and lonely destiny :-P. I read all of it and it only got worse, in my opinion.

... But then you go and spoil it all by dissing Three Men in a Boat! Admittedly, I've only read it once and it was my first really hilarious laugh-out-loud read, so I was probably more easily impressed. I wonder how it would hold up for me now.

I'm glad I put that spoiler warning on my review! I do try to remember to do that, but sometimes it just doesn't come to mind.

*needs to go update her own thread instead of chattering away in Nathan's*

Teresa: Sure it's not as strong as her later novels, but so what? I've always found it delightful and quite witty.

Indeed. This time around, it died for me a little, about half-way through. Not much seemed to happen. But I think that might be more due to me than to the novel. I think I mentioned way back in my review of Macbeth that sometimes the experience of reading is just as important to one's enjoyment of it as the book itself, and this was definitely the case here. Because I loved it so much the first time 'round—and because that read was only two years ago—I didn't give it too hard a time. And really, it's still charming. At the moment I think it's my least favorite Austen, but again, that's hardly a bad place to be.

And the YouTube clips of the '80s adaptation are scary enough. I may watch the movie at some point, but I have better Austen films to watch and re-watch before I'll stoop to that! "Since you left the white rose bush has died of grief...."

citygirl: Tilney may be Da Man, but you must admit that Catherine is dilly.

True, true. *adds dilly to his list of Catherineisms, along with ding-y (hyphen included to make sure it is not mistaken for the synonym of musty)* She's probably my least favorite Austen heroine (again, there's great competition), but I far from dislike her. A classmate once compared her to Harriet Smith, which I think is fair.

I am very much looking forward to reading your thoughts on Mansfield Park.

I'm very much looking forward to writing them! Like Emma, it's an extremely complex book, so there is so very much to say about it. (Note that I quite disliked both of these the first time around, but now enjoy both greatly.) There's the feeling of claustrophobia, the complex relationships, the importance of duty, the socio-sexual drama unfolding before us of which we and Fanny are spectators ... ah! Good stuff.

I'm going to hurry the rest of this post up, b/c the computer just warned me it plans to shut down in 5 mins. (But I don't want you to, silly thing! Aren't I the master here?)

Amy: *needs to go update her own thread instead of chattering away in Nathan's*

No worries. I love it when you chatter away. I've just done so in yours as well. ;)

(I really do plan to follow up & come talk Northanger Abbey & other things in here. But I'm super, super busy with school this week. I'll be back. :)

>52 ChocolateMuse: - The book I meant was The female quixote by Charlotte Lennox. I was browsing deliciously in a secondhand bookshop this afternoon and saw it there, and it all came back to me.

Came away with more sheet music than literature though, including a gorgeous red hardcover book of Chopin's pieces (sonata, funeral march, difficult stuff like that which I can't actually play). It's got a gold embossed title, and looks as if it might be quite old. It says c1900 on the front, but surely that can't mean it was bound in 1900...

Thanks for following up on that Rena! I'll have to try The Female Quixote at some point; I saw it in the library last semester and it looked interesting. Also, my professor mentioned it in an article she had published in Persuasions about the role of Fanny as comforter in Mansfield Park.

Speaking of which, I just finished MP, and I absolutely loved it, which is great since I only mildly enjoyed it the first time. It's my favorite JA reread so far, bar none—although I doubt its assumption of that position will continue for very long, as we still have Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility, and Persuasion to go. Next week, though, we'll be making our detour for Cold Comfort Farm.

(I plan to review The Castle in the Attic, Emma, and Mansfield soon, in that order.)

For Jane Austen movie night #3, we watched the Rozema version of MP this Wednesday. I think it would have offended me far more if I hadn't been prepared for it by all the criticisms Amy in particular has made of it, and I certainly watched it in the best possible setting: with a group of snarky Janeites. It is, in a word, ridiculous. Several of us decided that a good one-word summary of it as an adaptation would be "WHAT??" Certainly we exclaimed through large parts of it—when Fanny accepted Henry, when she made many of her satirical remarks that were totally out of character, when Mary Crawford started talking about the possibility of Tom dying and making the Edmund the heir in front of the family! Like I said, ridiculous. The character Frances O'Conner plays in this movie is not Fanny Price—she's an interesting character, but not Fanny Price. And even more surprisingly, the Crawfords were made into out-and-out creepers and villains. Where's the complexity in their original portrayals? And Sir Thomas was a villain and a rapist. And Tom a suffering hero. Gah! Pretty much the only characters they got right were Mrs. Norris and Mr. Rushworth, and maybe Maria as well. Again, a fun party movie and opportunity for snarkiness, but not something I need to see again, despite the lovely cinematography and music, and the (mostly) talented cast.

I'm watching the newest adaptation in bits and pieces right now, and while it's not really Mansfield Park either, I'm finding it less offensive than the Rozema. Although I gather from reviews that this version includes neither the visit to Sotherton, nor the ball, nor the scenes in Portsmouth. What kind of MP is that? I guess I'd better hold out for the 80s miniseries....

The Fanny Price in the Rozema version is actually supposed to be Jane Austen herself. A writer, an independent strong-willed intelligent young lady - the popular depiction of Austen. And that line she gives Crawford at the ball, "I complimented your dancing, not you. Keep your wig on", is attributed to Austen herself I believe.

I personally like the 80s miniseries a lot. Some say it copies the book too slavishly, but I don't find that a fault in this case. I get annoyed by the Crawfords' matching wigs though - the kind that makes their whole scalp move when they raise their eyebrows.

Speaking of ugly hair and Jane Austen adaptations....



Ewan MacGregor, keep your wig off. Eww.

I'm planning on posting an Emma review this evening, and was going to include some praise of Andrew Davies' screenplay for the Beckinsale film, even though I haven't seen it in forever (I probably will anyway); however, I must say that next time I watch it I will definitely be looking closer at it, because I just found this article about it by Davies himself and I must say I am rather shocked:

http://www.strangegirl.com/emma/daviestel.php

I agree with some of what he's saying here, such as Emma herself having an author's imagination, but she has more positive character traits than he gives her credit for. And he seriously thinks Frank seduced Jane in Weymouth? And that he had sexual intentions towards Emma? And Mr. Knightley is either a cradle-robber or after her fortune? What the heck? No comments about his original coda: there's a reason everyone else thought it was in poor taste, Mr. Davies. *rolls eyes*

Part of me thinks he just says these things in interviews to draw attention to himself. I certainly never got them from the movie.

Actually, I would rather not know any more about Davies wanting to sex things up than I already do, thanks much *shudders*

*laughs at the wig pic*

And I'm glad you got to watch the Rozema Emma in such good company! It was one of my first Austen adaptations and it took me a little while to realize what a bad one it is. I hadn't yet developed that defined, defensible sense of what Austen is really about. Now, that sense is well developed indeed. Maybe too much!

Was Sir Thomas really a rapist though? I didn't think it was actually HIM in those drawings of Tom's, just scenes that Tom had observed, but I could be wrong, certainly. I just can't get over how utterly out of place such things are in an Austen film.

Certainly you don't have to follow the link, and I hope I sufficiently made clear the content of that article/interview, but I thought I'd post it for anyone who was interested. Since I'm shortly to do a paper on various adaptations of Emma, I thought I ought to take a look. I find Davies insufferable because for the most part his work is absolutely brilliant ... and then he tosses things in there that are not only offensive but entirely out of place. Thankfully the producers of Pride and Prejudice and Emma reigned him in where others have given him far too much leeway.

There is at least one picture in Tom's sketchbook (in the Rozema Mansfield Park) that is clearly of Sir Thomas, but it's not one of the more sexually explicit ones. Rozema has said in an interview, however, that he was a rapist, along with other things I don't feel like posting here. But I'm starting to think less and less of writers coming back and giving us additional tidbits about their books or screenplays.... *coughDaviescoughJ.K.Rowlingcough* Besides, if I wanted to hear background info from anyone, it would be Austen herself!

I watched the Billie Piper Mansfield Park yesterday while at home recovering from having a tooth out. I got a clear sense of these being a bunch of modern characters walking around in period costume. Apart from the obvious travesties (no Portsmouth, Fanny dressed like a pirate wench, etc) I felt like everything was rushed, also that all the original innuendo was stated right out in so many words. And Edmund keeps coming into Fanny's bedroom?!?! Do these people have any idea what a scandal that would have been, even between cousins? And Fanny brings up her abolitionist statement just once, at the dinner table, and the point is never raised again, it just drops into pointless nothingness. And without knowing the book, you'd have no idea that Mr Crawford believes his pursuit of Fanny to be serious and genuine - one gets the impression that he really is just playing around. Argharghargh.

I also watched (again) Northanger Abbey. I am so in love with Mr Tilney (sorry to sound like those I-Love-Edward-Cullen people). Interesting point: I didn't look up names or anything, but I do believe the actor who plays Mrs Allen in NA is Fanny Price in the 80s MP miniseries.

Re all the background info stuff - I say Austen is one of those novelists who should not be picked apart and deconstructed Freudishly. It destroys her magic.

Yes, Sylvestra something-or-other (O'Touzel?—she has the most fantastical name, but I can never remember it clearly) is both the 80s Fanny Price and the new Mrs. Allen. What's even neater is that she and her Edmund Bertram played a married couple in the recent film Amazing Grace. Fun stuff!

Updating my reading log, although there's only one review to post, of The Castle in the Attic. I feel the tone of the review is a little too formal, but I really enjoyed this reread; it's one of those books that seems to have been written explicitly for me. I was reading passages of its sequel out loud to my best friend the other day, and he asked me if I was sure the author hadn't based the protagonist off me! Review @ http://www.librarything.com/work/86263/reviews/54547759

And updated reading log, to keep things tidy....

9. Emma by Jane Austen



10. The Castle in the Attic by Elizabeth Winthrop



11. Mansfield Park by Jane Austen



Again, Austen reviews forthcoming, and hopefully sooner than later. But I want the mood to strike me, rather than forcing them out.

ChocolateMuse, didn't he come into her bedroom in the book? Or just the sitting room outside of her bedroom? (I haven't seen the Billie Piper move, altho I'd like to.)

He came into the "little white attic," which was the old schoolroom that Fanny had taken possession of, and made a sort of study. No self-respecting man of good propriety would have entered a lady's chamber in those days, even if she was his cousin.

Thanks, I remember now. I really liked that attic room.

Yeah, that's one of the few things I liked in the Rozema film (and one of the many things I missed in the Billie Piper version, which I watched recently and will post more about later): they included the little white attic! Fanny needs to have her own private "space."

I know, I was always so happy that Fanny at least had *one* space she could call her own in that house (even if it never had a fire...).

Looking forward to the Austen reviews, Nathan. I find that sometimes it's beneficial to wait a little while before reviewing a book, especially when it's something like MP. If I let it percolate in my brain, new ideas occur to me. Usually by the time I can sit down and write the review, I'm itching to do so because I have a mental checklist of points I want to bring out.

Our MP editions are the same, btw. Your Emma cover is a little odd, isn't it? The clouds in the background look rather epic, which Emma — and Austen in general — certainly are not.

I actually need to change the cover photo for my Emma copy, because I bought it used without a dust jacket, so it's only a little gray hardcover! I think I may prefer it that way.

EDIT: Speaking of odd Emma covers ...



Is that supposed to be Mr. Elton proposing? LOL!

Oh, that's pretty awful!

>77 ncgraham: Oh, I love it! It's so bad it's wonderful! Thanks for sharing that, Nathan :)

Nice review, I must read Castle in the Attic one day.

You're welcome. You know, if any of you ever find a copy with that cover, you simply must buy it (and send it to me if you can't bear the sight of it) as a joke.

So, really quickly, my thoughts on the 2007/BBC/Billie Piper version of Mansfield Park:

• As a whole, this adaptation didn't seem to quite know what it was doing, as opposed to the Rozema version, which had a very clear (if misguided) agenda. It felt like the filmmakers sat down and said, "Okay, we have this novel. We have this budget. We have one location. {*cough, cough* not enough for Mansfield Park} We have a standardized costume drama television audience we need to appeal to. And we have an hour and a half to tell the story. Now let's do this!" For instance, in the Rozema there was obviously a very pointed decision to make Movie!Fanny radically different from Book!Family, to turn her into a modern woman, a proto-feminist with distinct flavors of Austen herself. In the new version, she just happens to be spirited and healthy and cheerful.

• All this reached a head after Fanny turns down Henry Crawford. Up until that point, I was actually sort of enjoying the film as a costume piece that just happened to be decidedly similar to Mansfield Park. But because Portsmouth obviously wasn't in ITV's budget, the whole plot was rewritten from that point on. There were so many random comings and goings ... I completely lost track of what was going on. Gah.

• Along with the visit to Portsmouth, there was no Southerton excursion and no ball. Aren't those some of the most memorable scenes in the book? They tried to salvage the ball by making it into a picnic, but it didn't work. I strongly doubt there would have been musicians and dancing at a picnic.

• In my opinion, Billie Piper did the best she possibly could with Fanny given the script, direction, and costuming (*ahem*hair*ahem*)—which wasn't much, but admirable none the less. In particular, there was a softness to her Fanny in the more intimate scenes that Frances O'Connor totally lacked. Despite her appearance, she might have actually made a decent Fanny in other circumstances. A pity.

• Blake Ritson was excellent as Edmund. I liked Jonny Lee Miller in the other version, he did make the character a little weak. Ritson shows more strength of purpose.

• I just really, really dislike Douglas Hodge as an actor. I disliked his Lydgate in the BBC Middlemarch, and his Sir Thomas was even worse. Why do modern adaptations insist that this character is a villain through-and-through? I don't get it.

• Of the minor characters, one that stuck out was Maria. It was just a really well-acted part, and the look she gives Crawford as she goes off for her Honeymoon was perfect.I was grateful that we had at least a little of the Maria/Julia rivalry over Henry Crawford in this version. I distinctly missed that in the Rozema version. The theatricals were set up well too, but why didn't they use the real text of Lover's Vows—laziness?

• After the Rozema, it was refreshing to have Mary Crawford actually be engaging and attractive, rather than totally creepy and villainous and uncouth. As with Edmund and Maria, well done.

• Unfortunately, this was not so for Henry. Will they ever get this complex character right? I think the actor fit the role well—I can't decide which I prefer better, him or the fellow from '99—but the script failed him. They never even showed the shift he undergoes, from wanting to make Fanny fall in love with him to falling in love with her himself! That's, like, an important plot point, yo!

I could go on and on but I'd better stop right here. In short, I don't recommend either this or the Rozema.

I just received notification that I'm getting The Brontes Went to Woolworths as an Early Reviewers book this month. Has anyone ever read it? It was written at about the same time as Cold Comfort Farm, and in certain ways they sound a little similar. And the cover is quite nice, too, if a little ... purple.



Speaking of CCF, I finished it today, and enjoyed it mightily, although I'm not sure I approved of every single one of Flora's solutions.

Speaking of CCF, I finished it today, and enjoyed it mightily, although I'm not sure I approved of every single one of Flora's solutions.

I was just reading some of Cold Comfort Farm aloud to hubby last night. Love it, love it, love it. Sometimes I think Gibbons's treatment of Flora's solutions adds an extra layer of humor & irony to the book. I still laugh when I think that Flora's "solution" for Elfride's "problem" of her flitting around in the woods all wild-child was to comb out her hair, put her in a pretty dress, & get her married off.

I would like a liddle mop wi' a handle.

Do you cletter your dishes with a thorn at the moment? ;)

I started Sense and Sensibility for class last night. Even though this is a reread and has always been one of my favorite Austen stories, I've been having a hard time getting into it this time. The conversation between Mr. and Mrs. John Dashwood is hilarious ("People always live forever when there is any annuity to be paid them") but I'm not finding it easy to relate to either Elinor or Marianne at the moment. Maybe I've watched the Thomson film too many times....

Not sure when I'll have any reviews up, or finish my extracurricular reading. I'm struggling just to get my reading, papers, and poems done for class right now.

Still not making much headway in S&S. We did, however, watch the Hindi film adaptation I Have Found It this Wednesday, and I found it to be a truly unique experience. The last thing I thought I'd ever see in this world was an Edward Ferrars character doing a song and dance number.... Yeah. The whole musical side of it really confused me; I'm aware now that there is deeper religious and cultural meaning to some of the dances, but they seemed totally random to me. And the lyrics were either really bad or didn't translate into English well. "How can the window shut out the fragrant breeze?" Yeah. Mmmmhmmm. The sisters were pretty well characterized, especially Elinor, but the suitors were very different from Austen. Colonel Brandon was a drunk at the beginning of the movie! That said, there was a very nice denouement for he and Marianne, whereas the Elinor/Edward plot-line ended up crumbling in upon itself.

So far, my favorite of the films we've watched for class is Clueless, but the best is still to come: the Hinds/Root Persuasion. :D

Speaking of that adaptation, I'm currently working on a paper comparing the use of propriety (or lack thereof) and nonverbal communication in different adaptations of Emma, and one of my sources, Jane Austen on Screen, includes an article about that Persuasion that just drives me crazy:

Amanda Root's wide-eyed, jittery performance (this Anne seems much younger than Austen's heroine), her public displays of emotion, seem essentially at odds with the "themes, moods, and effects"of Austen's Persuasion.... Ciaran Hinds' Wentworth, confident and mature (as well as very good-looking), doesn't seem to be a man to be captivated by the nervous quiverings of Root's Anne Elliot.

Whatever.

While I think that quote from Jane Austen on Screen is generally off, I strongly objected to how the writers had Anne make such a scene at the concert in Bath. This certainly struck me as an inappropriate public display of emotion. As for the rest of it, meh. I did originally think that Anne might be a tad too wide-eyed and reserved, but I came around.

PS Hope S&S starts working out for you. It was definitely not my favorite, and, together with Northanger Abbey, I decided that I don't think it's worthy of the rest of her work. But I might change my mind someday upon rereading. At least the film you watched tried to give Colonel Brandon some kind of real personality trait. He came off as very thin and unreal to me when I read the book.

My goodness, I'm a bit of a pill this afternoon. Time for tea. :)

See, I loved S&S my first time around, so I hope it starts working for me too. And the story is definitely one of my favorites ... the Thompson adaptation is what turned me on to Austen in the first place, actually.

There are a few inappropriate displays of emotion in the '95 Persuasion, which the article tries very hard to highlight. But to characterize Root's Anne as jittery and too young strikes me as completely wrong: indeed, the maturity and quiet solidarity of her performance has always been one of the things that attracted me to that version.

One article I'm very much enjoying in the book is David Monaghan's "Emma and the art of adaptation." He's probably a bit too hard on the Paltrow film, but it's a good analysis overall.

Yeah, I wouldn't describe Root's Anne as "jittery." And too young, that's just silly. "Jittery," "wide-eyed," and "nervous" are not traits that belong exclusively to young people, unless you're talking about 5-year-olds hiding behind their mother's skirts.

I bet I would like that Monaghan article. I think I'll add that book to my wishlist. Maybe buy a used paperback sometime.

I just found the most delicious set of Georgette Heyer novels on sale via E-bay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Georgette-Heyer-LOT-of-11-VINTAGE-HBDJ_W0QQitemZ290412218726...

If only they were going for $5-$10 less, my Scottish thriftiness might allow me to take the plunge.

EDIT: Another fun thing I found today. I don't drink coffee and am not looking for a "seductive" experience, but these make for nice background listening. I especially enjoy Dan Stevens doing Middlemarch. (He might make a good Ladislaw, eh? Better than Edward Ferrars....)

http://www.cartenoire.co.uk/

The carte noir link is cool and yet annoying - kind of patronising, besides being blatant marketing... but still, I like Dominic West's reading of Chekhov.

It's true. Again, trying to ignore the "hot British guys trying to sell you on our coffee" side of it and enjoy the readings.

If that reviewer think Amanda Root's Anne is jittery, has he/she seen Sally Hawkins in the role?!?

S&S will always be one of my favorites for the simple reason that it was the first Austen I read, and plunged me headlong into that world. I haven't returned since :)

The Heyer set is nice, but a bit mismatched for me. If I'm going to spend "real money" (as opposed to BM or PBS points), I'd like it to have a little more uniformity and be in better condition.

And speaking of book sets, Wodehouse fans might want to check this out: http://www.bookdepository.com/blog/post/tag/wodehouse-competition-win-70-everyma...

If that reviewer think Amanda Root's Anne is jittery, has he/she seen Sally Hawkins in the role?!?

The article was written before the new adaptation came out, so no thoughts on Hawkins in the essay. It would have been interesting to hear them, though. Oddly enough, the writer really liked Ann Firbank in the old ITV miniseries, who I thought looked all wrong (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiEydwfZR5E).

See, I have yet to get into this book-trading thing and am still used to paying money for them. Also, I am sort of picky about the editions of books I own, particularly books I like. With this set I get that lovely old hardcover of Cotillion, and several other new Heyers to enjoy—and, if I don't particularly like the copies of them, replace down the road. So, yes, in a moment of weakness I bid on the set and won it. Quite excited about it, actually.

I went and looked at the Heyers on Ebay too. I have a number of copies I got in the 70s that are starting to fall apart, so at some time will need to replace them. Saw some nice editions at reasonable prices, so when I'm ready, will definitely check out that venue.

Haha, the ones I've gotten are mostly from the '70s! Some of them look lovely, mostly the hardcovers. The others ... eh ... but I got 11 of 'em! One favorite and ten more to enjoy, for $20 plus shipping. Not a great deal, but a good one and one I'm happy with.

Plus I will now have a copy of Friday's Child, which I've been looking for for ever.

Friday's Child!!! W00000!!! Very happy!

Looking forward to all your Heyer reviews, Nathan.

I'm looking forward to reading and reviewing all of them, Rena. After purchasing all of those Regencies, though (and some of them have pink covers too ... you know how I feel about those ... ) I feel as if I need to read something very manly, like The Maltese Falcon.

If only I had the time.

For the record, here are the books I won:

Cotillion
Fridays Child
Devil's Cub
Arabella
The Masqueraders
Sylvester
The Foundling
The Talisman Ring
Why Shoot a Butler?
They Found Him Dead
Envious Casca

Oh, and speaking of reviews ... I may whip some up for Cold Comfort Farm and The Phantom of the Opera tonight. I've had them jumping about in my head for a couple of days now.

Excellent. I see you have some of her contemporary mysteries there too - DON'T start with Envious Casca. Either of the others are okay. Her mysteries work particularly well as audio books. If you can ever get hold of the Chivers audio of A Blunt Instrument, or No Wind of Blame (unfortunately can't remember the readers' names, bad Rena), grab them with your life. They bring the characters to life in a way they wouldn't have done on the page for me, and I for one fell in love with them. And my highest recommendation of her mysteries is Behold, Here's Poison.

I must write my Heyer essay, mustn't I...

YOur first three listed are three of my favorites! Enjoy!

Just an FYI - I'm going to be bowing out from LT for a month or so here, in order to focus on schoolwork. My dad's resetting my password and will return it to me once the semester is over. I'll keep track of my reading, maybe write a few reviews off-line, and catch everyone up when I get back. Remember that if you leave a comment on my profile wall, I'll still be able to see it on my e-mail. ;)

Awwww. :( See you when you get back, and I hope you read some Heyer while you're gone!

Hey everyone—I'm back! I've been doing a lot of reading too, but I'm saving that for another post. I have messages to return, other threads to catch up on, books to add, and reviews to write ... but I hope to have a reading log update + links to reviews later this week.

So glad to continue our discussions!

*trumpet blast!* Glad to see you back, and I hope you're starting to recuperate from your semester. I look forward to hearing about your reading.

Welcome back!

Urrrrgggh. Still haven't caught up on my reviews. I must report, though, that Meddy and Rena's joint perusal of Daniel Deronda has caused me to start Scenes of Clerical Life over again (I first began it a couple of months back, but didn't get much further than the first couple of chapters). I just finished the first story, "The Sad Fortunes of the Rev. Amos Barton." It's rough Eliot, certainly, and more than a little reminiscent of Dickens in places, but very powerful all the same. I was in tears by the end.

Some choice quotes:

- "Mine, I fear, is not a well-regulated mind: it has an occasional tenderness for old abuses; it lingers with a certain kindness over the days of nasal clerks and top-booted parsons, and it has a sigh for the departed shades of vulgar errors."

- "We are poor plants buoyed up by the air-vessels of our own conceit: alas for us, if we get a few pinches that empty us of that windy self-subsistence!"

- "he was more apt to fall into a blunder than into a sin"

- "Mrs Hackit regulated her costume by the calendar, and brought out her furs on the first of November, whatever might be the temperature. She was not a woman weakly to accommodate herself to shilly-shally proceedings. If the season didn't know what it ought to do, Mrs. Hackit did."

And my two favorites, both of them long, and beloved for very different reasons:

- "Reader! did you ever taste such a cup of tea as Miss Gibbs is this moment handing to Mr Pilgrim? Do you know the dulcet strength, the animating blandness of tea sufficiently blended with real farmhouse cream? No—most likely you are a miserable town-bred reader, who think of cream as a thinnish white fluid, delivered in infinitesimal pennyworths down area steps; or perhaps, from a presentiment of calves' brains, you
refrain from any lacteal addition, and rasp your tongue with unmitigated bohea. You have a vague idea of a milch cow as probably a white-plaster animal standing in a butterman's window, and you know nothing of the sweet history of genuine cream, such as Miss Gibbs's: how it was this morning in the udders of the large sleek beasts, as they stood lowing a patient entreaty under the milking-shed; how it fell with a pleasant rhythm into Betty's pail, sending a delicious incense into the cool air; how it was carried into that temple of moist cleanliness, the dairy, where it quietly separated itself from the meaner elements of milk, and lay in mellowed whiteness, ready for the skimming-dish which transferred it to Miss Gibbs's glass cream-jug. If I am right in my conjecture, you are unacquainted with the highest possibilities of tea; and Mr Pilgrim, who is holding that cup in his hands, has an idea beyond you."

- "Yet these commonplace people—many of them—bear a conscience, and have felt the sublime prompting to do the painful right; they have their unspoken sorrows, and their sacred joys; their hearts have perhaps gone out towards their first-born, and they have mourned over the irreclaimable dead. Nay, is there not a pathos in their very insignificance—in our comparison of their dim and narrow existence with the glorious possibilities of that human nature which they share? Depend upon it, you would gain unspeakably if you would learn with me to see some of the poetry and the pathos, the tragedy and the comedy, lying in the experience of a human soul that looks out through dull grey eyes, and that speaks in a voice of quite ordinary tones."

The first is just tongue-lickingly delicious, and the second is, I feel, central to Eliot's fiction in general. I particularly like the phrase "the sublime prompting to do the painful right" ... it makes me think of Dorothea.

Thanks for those quotes Nathan. Deliciously Eliotish. Character, always character - and so much like all the different people I am myself.

After finishing "Mr Gilfil's Love Story" (not so many great quotes this time—I think I'll just hold them to post alongside whatever nuggets I find in "Janet's Repentance"), I decided I needed a short break from Eliot, so last night I picked up and devoured Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None, which I certainly enjoyed. I'm not sure my review said everything I wanted it to say, such as the fact that I figured out the murderer (yay!) or that I find Christie is a little too fond of her ellipses. I don't think this one is heading straight to the top of my favorites list, largely because I didn't find the characters too engaging, but as a whole this left me with a much more positive view of Christie, and a greater desire to read her books in the future.

While I'm posting this, I might as well inform you all that I'm switching up the format for this thread a bit, and changing up the way I LibraryThing a little as well. I'm not going to do the reading log quite the way I've been doing it—posting the covers, etc., is just too complicated. I may post a FULL reading log at the top of the thread, as I see so many others do. Also, I'm not going to be so stringent about "making up" reviews. I'm still going to try to review all the books I read from here on out, while they're still fresh in my mind, and I do still plan to go back and review some of the books I read earlier this year—The Battle for the Castle and The Last Battle, for instance—but don't be holding out for my Austen and LotR reviews. They're not coming. However, most of the books I'm skipping over are books I will be reading again, and thus will have another opportunity to review.

Speaking of which, here are some of my recent reads/reviews, in case some interested parties have missed them:

Drinkwater by Otto Scamfer—this was a Member Giveaway book, and possibly the worst thing I've read in years. Preachy, cliche, poorly researched, utterly anachronistic, and terribly written, I had a difficult time even taking it seriously ... which is probably why my review is Pure Snark. I'm quite proud of it, actually. :D

Rapunzel retold and illustrated by Alix Berenzy—as I have a sister ten years younger than me, I've read a lot of picture books over the past few years, many of the fairy tale titles having been purchases of my own. The ones that I've counted as part of my LT reading and gone on to review in the past have always been textually interesting/important in comparison to traditional versions. Berenzy's really ... isn't. But it's a fine picture book all the same.

The Princess Bride by William Goldman—I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually preferred the movie. Sure, the book is clever and satirical and more heavily postmodern ... but for me, the movie's more fun. Still, it was wonderful getting all the back stories, meeting Buttercup's parents, etc. I just could have done with all the extraneous material before and after the story itself.

Fool's Run by Patricia McKillip—I don't read much science fiction, but I very much enjoyed this. I only had a few objections—one main character lacking development, for instance—that kept it from being one of my top McKillips. As with almost everything this author writes, there are whole passages suffused with an almost supernatural beauty, and unlike most of the other writers whose books I've been reading recently, there was nothing I could find error with in her prose. Also, until the ending, this is one of McKillip's more straightforward novels, so I would definitely recommend it to fans of either the author or the genre.

Nathan, interesting reaction about The Princess Bride. Do you think you would feel the same if you had read the book first? That movie is a family favorite for us, and like so many who have watched it, we've rolled its catch phrases into our life ..."Have fun storming the castle..."

Honestly, I'm not sure I would have gotten through the book if I hadn't seen the movie ... it would have been hard getting through the three (!!!) introductions if I hadn't known what lay in store for me in terms of the story. Parts of the movie are lifted word-for-word from the book. Many others are improvements. Also, Book!Buttercup can be a bit of a pill in places.

EDIT: I do think I'm being overly negative here; during some sections of my reading, I was much more positive in my sentiments than my posts here would indicate—my review probably captured the overall experience of reading the book better. (BTW, the hyperlinked titles in my last posts redirect to my reviews ... not sure I made that clear.) Once I got past the introductions, it was definitely an engrossing read, and I could barely put it down. I just feel that Goldman improved upon himself when he adapted the book for the screen. (Playwright Robert Bolt did the same with A Man for All Seasons, IMHO.) He was also probably helped by some of the actors' ad-libbing.

awww no LoTR review :(

But that's okay, lots of others to make up for it :)

And then there were none is one of my favourite Christies. It is indeed a little too tidy, but that's Christie for ya. Cozy mysteries.

Great comments. I have The Princess Bride on my shelf to read. As I was paying for it, a friend a few rows over in the bookstore was saying the book was inferior to the movie... I continued to pay for it anyway, figuring I'll try it out for myself.

Indeed, I had a similar experience, Laura! And I still asked for it as a birthday present, read it, and got it. I'm going to hold onto it, too—the story per se is good enough that I can see myself reading the again. Let me know if you read it, and if so what you think of it!

Hmmm, Rena, I'm not sure I'd call And Then There Were None "cozy." Clever certainly, suspenseful as well, dark, moody, even a little nihilistic. But not cozy. ;) I watched the 1945 movie version the other day, and it was considerably "cozier," but at the expense of believability.

My little sister and I finished our read-aloud of Ginger Pye the other day, and I wrote up a short review of it just now. This was one of my childhood favorites, and I am always a little aghast whenever I meet anyone who actively dislikes it (and I've met a few in my time). Some people think the constant flashbacks and back-stories kills the pacing; I think they are a bit much in one or two places, but overall, they make the Pyes seem even more real ... I mean, we are so much more than what we are at any given moment, aren't we? (Hope that made sense!) And apparently this LT reviewer thinks that the whole thing is too bright and cheery. Well, maybe, but would you show your child Rebel Without a Cause? I think this is a case of different approaches, and for a sunny retrospective on family and childhood, it doesn't get much better than Ginger Pye.

Hmm, I guess I was blanket-wrapping all Christies into one there. I concede your point :)

Third post in a row, I know, but I wanted to post some thoughts on Scenes of Clerical Life while they're still in my head.

I think the thing that's surprised me most about the first two stories are the lead female characters—they're surprisingly pale creations for Eliot. So many of the other characters and situations prefigure her later fiction, but it's hard to look at Milly Barton or Caterina Sarti and see in them any traces of Maggie Tulliver, Gwendolen Harleth, Dorothea Brooke. Milly is an idealized, angelic female very much in the vein of Dickens—no wonder he liked these stories!—and yet, like almost everything in that first story, she works in an odd, rough kind of way. It's Caterina (or Tina, as I shall now call her) who I've really been puzzling over. She's more flawed that Milly, but seems somehow less human, even in the midst of her consuming passions. At first I thought she was simply a poorly-written character, but I'm starting to wonder if Eliot meant to present her as something non-human. She's always being likened to animals or other natural objects; hence Sir Christopher refers to her as his "black-eyed monkey." And then there's this passage: "See how she rushes noiselessly, like a pale meteor, along the passages and up the gallery stairs! Those gleaming eyes, those bloodless lips, that swift silent tread, make her look like the incarnation of a fierce purpose, rather than a woman." The Penguin Classics editor calls this passage ridiculous, and I'm inclined to agree, but I don't know ... it's kind of fascinating too.

And here I have to add, now I've brought up Tina, how much I love all the musical references Eliot makes in her works. They add so much, not only to my ability to mentally "anchor" the events in the historical period, but also to my understanding of the characters. I don't know why, but somehow it's important to me that Tina sings Gluck and Paisiello with her heart full of conflicting emotions, that Rosamund would rather sing her two Mozart arias when her uncle calls for old English songs, that Gwendolen is unable to impress Klesmer with her singing of Bellini, and that Dorothea's speaking voice reminds Caleb Garth of "bits in the 'Messiah'".

I'm only a couple chapters into "Janet's Repentance" right now, but I'm really enjoying it. Lawyer Dempster is a great character that towers over the first scene. I love and hate him already.

Not three in a row - we cross-posted! And I love what you say about Eliot and music - I feel the same way.

I've been following your thread though I haven't posted much lately. Thanks for all the Eliot quotes... I'm planning on rereading Middlemarch sometime this year and this gets me more excited for the experience.

I never read Ginger Pye, but now I want to, very much! I have a copy or two, I think. Great review, Nathan.

...Mama’s brother Bennie ... is considered a hero in Cranbury because he is an uncle at only three years of age.

Love it!

Yeah, Uncle Bennie is one of my favorite characters. :P I think you'd really enjoy Ginger Pye! The writing is a little clunky in places, surprisingly so for a Newbery, but the characters and the humor more than make up for it. Y'know, at some point you and I should make each other YA to-read lists, and then read each other's recommendations. I could assign you Ginger Pye, the two Elizabeth Winthrop Castle books, and Edith Nesbit's The Railway Children, and you could assign me Ronia, The Indian in the Cupboard and, oh, whatever else you wish.

Good news! I found a stack of P. G. Wodehouse novels at a library book-sale the other day! The lady at the desk was quite jealous of me. ;)) Wodehouse wasn't on my reading list for this year, but he is now!

I'm near to being done with Scenes of Clerical Life. (Finally!) A few thoughts an quotes....

I've already talked a lot about "Mr Gilfil's Love Story," which is unquestionably the weakest of the three tales. Although it wasn't the most exciting part of the story (it didn't have the doomed love! and operatic excerpts! and ridiculously overwrought situations! of the Tina section), I think the frame chapters featuring the older Mr. Gilfil are the only things in the story that touch the brilliance of parts of "Amos Barton" and "Janet's Repentance." My favorite quotes are related to him, too:

- In the love of a brave and faithful man there is always a strain of maternal tenderness; he gives out again those beams of protecting fondness which were shed on him as he lay on his mother's knee.

In "Janet's Repentance," Eliot returns to the larger social vision that suffused the discourse of "Amos Barton." In these two stories, she is clearly on her home turf, in a way that she wasn't in the middle tale. Again she is concerned with the importance, the goodness, the failings of everyday people.

- Assuredly Milby had that salt of goodness which keeps the world together, in greater abundance than was visible on the surface: innocent babes were born there, sweetening their parents' hearts with simple joys; men and women withering in disappointed worldliness, or bloated with sensual ease, had better moments in which they pressed the hand of suffering with sympathy, and were moved to deeds of neighbourly kindness.

And it goes on. I would quote the whole page-length paragraph, but I fear that would be overdoing it. :P

Lawyer Dempster may be the best characters in all of the Scenes, so aptly does Eliot sketch his persona. I do think he may be slightly more compelling as the demagogue of the tavern than the wife-beating husband. Those first chapters is just such a jewel! Here's an example of Dempster's dialogue (or, rather, monologue):

- " ... Tell a man he is not to be saved by his works, and you open the flood-gates of all immorality. You see it in all these canting innovators; they're all bad ones by the sly; smooth-faced, drawling, hypocritical fellows, who pretend ginger isn't hot in their mouths, and cry down all innocent pleasures; their hearts are all the blacker for their sanctimonious outsides.... Depend upon it, whenever you see a man pretending to be better than his neighbors, that man has either some cunning end to serve, or his heart is rotten with spiritual pride." As if to guarantee himself against this awful sin, Mr Dempster seized his glass of brandy-and-water, and tossed off the ontents with even greater rapidity than usual.

Prior to reading "Janet's Repentance," I planned to write in my review that "though these stories are about clerics, Eliot is more interested in their everyday lives than their spiritual aspirations." While I would still maintain that to be true, "Janet" is definitely the most theological and religious of the stories, as it centers on the classic faith-versus-works controversy. It's fascinating to see Eliot, by this stage in her life an agnostic, engage in this debate. I'm not sure exactly where she falls.

- Mrs Rayor had her faith and her spiritual comforts, though she was not in the least evangelical and knew nothing of doctrinal zeal. I fear most of Mr Tryan's hearerswould have considered her destitute of saving knowledge, and I am quite sure she had no well-defined views on justification. Nevertheless, she read her Bible a great deal, and thought she found divine lessons there—how to bear the cross meekly, and be merciful. Let us hope there is a saving ignorance, and that Mrs Raynor was justified without knowing exactly how.

Congrats on the Wodehouse find!!!

>119 ncgraham: Nice! As for where Eliot falls, I would just say she falls in the place that tries (and succeeds) to understand exactly who and what and how that particular character is what she is, regardless of wider and bigger things.

I finally finished Scenes of Clerical Life! It was my first Eliot in a very long time, and probably will be my last for a while as well. While it was enjoyable (especially in terms of finding the links between these stories and her later fiction), it didn't really leave me thirsting for more, as much of her other stuff did. Review forthcoming.

In the meantime, I'm satisfying a random fantasy craving with Percival's Angel, which is distinctly so-so.

Y'know, at some point you and I should make each other YA to-read lists, and then read each other's recommendations.

I love this idea! Ronia's definitely going on yours. And maybe The Pushcart War. *thinks*

I gave you 4 titles ... is that a good number? We could play around with it some.

Four is good to start with. I've added your four to my 2010 list and will try to get to them soon. Have you read The Borrowers by Mary Norton? How about The Silver Crown by Robert O'Brien?

You were in my dream last night. I think this was influenced by your FB status the other day... I dreamt that you were looking for a non-feminine shower set, but all the soap smelled like flowers. I think I was trying to help you, but we weren't having any luck, lol.

ROFL! That's hilarious.

Ronia's already on my 2010 list, but I'll add The Pushcart War, The Borrowers, and The Silver Crown to it as well. (I think I started the last two once upon the time, but never got beyond their respective opening chapters. Ooops!)

Yay! This is going to be fun :)

Wow, Nathan. You've been back for like over a month, and I didn't even notice! How rude of moi indeed. Listen, Dude, I may be rude, but you, Young Man, read books that lots of girls (er, women, I mean, and lovely and erudite women, I might add) like. And I don't know hardly any of them - the books. But really, I'm belatedly glad you're back.

Aha, but reading such books makes for good conversation openings with lovely and erudite women, d'y'see? ;)

Sorry you didn't find out I was back sooner, and I'm glad you stopped by my thread. Do you have one of your own?

Finished Percival's Angel today—pretty awful, all in all—and not sure what my next complete fiction read is going to be. However, I am going to be dipping in and out of Jack Zipes' Beauties, Beasts, and Enchantments for the next few months. I read the introductory material and three of the Perrault tales this evening; this is already looking to be a treasured volume. Zipes' historical research is meticulous, and despite reading up on the background to Perrault et al. beforehand, it wasn't until I read his introduction that I was really able to understand the reasons these tales were written down, and some of the topical currents that flow through them. (For instance, who knew that the verse Donkeyskin, Griselda and Three Wishes were packaged with an essay in an attempt at early feminism? Fascinating.)

No Clerical Life review yet, I'm afraid, but that's coming soon. I can feel that it's going to be a biggie. But I did write my Percival's Angel review, if anyone is interested. It's probably not going to give Mr. Freeque a higher opinion of my manliness, considering it uses chocolate cravings as an analogy. (As a side note, I've discovered I'm allergic to dairy again. So no chocolate for me!)

Aaaand some catch-up reviews ...

Twelfth Night: not my favorite Shakespeare, I'm afraid. I just couldn't connect to any of the characters.

The Battle for the Castle: you all remember my review of The Castle in the Attic? Well, this is the sequel, and nearly as good.

The Jane Austen Book Club: in which it is revealed that reading Jane Austen helps your love life. Ugh.

That's good progress. I'm rather proud of myself. :P

In other news, I've picked up A Conspiracy of Kings, book #4 in Megan Whalen Turner's Attolia series. Really enjoying it so far ... the attack on the villa was incredibly exciting!

Nathan my friend, Real Men read Jane Austen. It's a fact.

That's a great review of the Jane Austen Book Club, and I think the chocolate craving analogy in Percival's Angel is excellent.

And... Anne Eliot Crompton? Minus the Crompton, I can see why you picked this one above the other not-so-great options! :)

I pity your chocolatelessness profoundly, That's terrible, I have chocolate on a daily basis and need it.

Yes, indeed:
http://data.rockyou.com/images/fbflair/pf_img/2/d/a/4/2da4bedbdd3f8f24df4987af84...

And the author's name was certainly a motive in picking Percival's Angel (and along with the Austen heroine, I had just finished reading a book by another Eliot ;) ). Another was the fact that it was about Percival. So many Arthurian novels these days are about Guinevere, Merlin, or Mordred. It would have been nice to have had a good Percival novel. Ah well.

One of my best friends just posted this on my Facebook wall. He knows me too well.

Hahahaha that's great!

Why Nathan, is that a self-portrait? Maybe you should put it in the opening post of your next thread like Porua does :D

So you really think you might like Conspiracy of Kings best of all? I liked it, but I think I was so immersed in the first three that anything new just had a sense of strangeness to it. I'm looking forward to rereading it eventually. You're still kind of new to the series, aren't you? Meaning you haven't been reading the series since The Thief came out in 1997 as I did. Maybe that's part of it.

Percival's Angel sounds dreadful, as does The Jane Austen Book Club. People who reduce Austen to romantic fluff miss so much!

I think I'll need to reread all the Attolia books in order to make a decision, but I certainly like A Conspiracy of Kings better than The King of Attolia, which I found rather slow-moving, and I was so shocked by The Queen of Attolia that I never could really figure out my opinion of it. So right now, it's between The Thief and ACoK. Before the next book comes out, I'll definitely make my way back through the series.

And nah, I'm not a superhero scribe like good ol' Will.

Now I'm out of the Perrault section, some thoughts on the varous fairy tales in Beauties, Beasts and Enchantments:

"The Adventures of Finette" - a little moralistic, in that the characters even are named after various virtues and vices, but the section in which Finette defends herself and her sisters from the evil wiles of Rich-Craft is just awesome. Give me a fairy-tale princess who can defend herself with a hammer and then send the dastardly villain down the latrine. Oh, yeah.

(Unstated Fairy-Tale Moral #1: if you get prego, Daddy will send you to Fairy Godmother for punishment.)

"Riquet with the Tuft" - a very different version from Perrault's, surprisingly dark and feminist and modern. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it.

(Unstated Fairy-Tale Moral #2: if two men are indistinguishable from each other, it is OK to marry them both.)

"The Good Woman" - what is it with French fairy tale authors and pits full of snakes and adders? They seem to crop up everywhere; it's not something I'd seen previously, even in the Brothers Grimm. Anyway, this is as may be. In certain bits (notably the opening), this is more like a novel than any other fairy tale I've read. Interesting.

(I'm not going to even attempt an Unstated Fairy-Tale Moral for this one. There are just too many to begin to choose one.)

"The Queen of the Island of Flowers" - they live on an Island of Flowers? Suh-weet. And there are other islands made up of various other oddments as well? And one Queen (not the Queen of the title) who is evil and jealous and exacting who rules over them all, with the assistance of a not-so-evil-and-jealous-and-exacting husband? Even cooler. And this is all before the heroine falls down a rabbit hole.

(Unstated Fairy-Tale Moral #3: be kind to puppies ... because they may be heartthrobs in disguise.)

Haha, that's it so far. I don't think I'll keep doing this for every tale, but I felt inspired today. I hope you all enjoyed reading this, because I sure enjoyed writing it.

I did. :)

I've been nursing a slight cold for the last week or two, so I've been doing quite a bit of reading.

I finished A Conspiracy of Kings and posted some spoilery thoughts in an appropriate thread over in the Attolian Conspiracy group. Despite a few quibbles, I loved it overall. Megan Whalen Turner is probably the best author writing for the YA/teen crowd these days. Her prose is wonderful, and the twists she throws in are becoming almost legendary, but it's her characters that are slowly winning me over. They're unique in the most traditional sense of the word—you would never confuse the word or action of one with that of any other person, in this book or any other. Wow!

Since then I've read two fairly short books, neither of which I particularly liked (Conspiracy was definitely a mountain of wonderfulness popping up amid a sea of blandness ... remember that I prefaced this read with the dire Percival's Angel):

First there was Briar Rose, a fairytale retelling by Jane Yolen that I picked up once a long time ago but decided to wait on until I was older. Now, I do think Yolen is a highly talented writer ... her short story "Meditations in a Whitethorn Tree" really wowed me when I read it a couple of years ago. And the premise of this is just fantastic—the heroine, Becca, has grown up hearing her grandmother tell the story of the Sleeping Beauty in the Wood, and on her deathbed the old woman claims that she is Briar Rose, and extracts a promise from Becca to go and find her castle, and her prince. The book mixes the beauty of the fairy tale with the horrors of the Holocaust, which I think is a fascinating idea. But the execution is very, very flawed. The grandmother was really the only interesting character in the thing, and Yolen seemed to me to be spending half the time shouting about how socially relevant she was. (Becca works for an ALTERNATIVE NEWSPAPER!!! There's a GAY CHARACTER!!! OMG!!!) Unfortunate.

And I've just finished my first Early Reviewers book in an eternity, The Brontës Went to Woolworths by Rachel Ferguson. This is another one that started out well and ended poorly. The first chapter is just a delight ... how could I not fall in love with characters that reject proposals of marriage because they are too much in love with Sherlock Holmes, or mention how characters get "taken pornographic" in Shakespeare plays (it's so truuuueee!), or describe books as "absolute necessities which one never thinks of in terms of appreciation"? Great, great, great. But then it just got odd. The three sisters live in a dream world all their own, one that doesn't exactly gel with reality, but Feguson never really comes down on whether this is a good thing or not, and in the end I was made slightly uncomfortable by it. It didn't help that her version of "reality" includes ghosts visiting the living in order to set things to rights, which doesn't bother me in pure fantasy, but seems rather out of place here. The things I liked best about it were the gawgeous artwork on the cover, the first chapter, and of course all the Bronte reference. Oh! and Mildred and Toddy were dears.

No complete reviews, yet. There may be some, and there may not. We'll see.

Thinking I'll finish up The Princess and the Goblin now. At least I know how that one goes.

Speaking of reviews....

The Austen nut sends another would-be modern imitator packing. I didn't come down on this one quite as harshly as I did on The Jane Austen Book Club, mostly because it's so freakin' entertaining, as much as it pains me to admit it. Lots of un-Austeneque immorality on the part of the protagonist, but no rape scenes! Yay!

(Wow, I never thought I'd be rejoicing over a book's lack of rape scenes. Now you all understand why I spent parts of my Austen class longing to get back to Austen's own novels ... except for when we read Cold Comfort Farm, that is. That one was a keeper.)

Good review of Bridget Jones' Diary, Nathan. I have that one but haven't made it a priority, largely because of the vulgarity I noticed when I flipped through it. There is a typo in this sentence:

I can picture Mrs. Bennett, were she dropped into the modern world, breakign up her marriage and running off with some random man.

I will head over to the Attolia group to catch up on your CoK thoughts. I have to agree with your thoughts on Turner; she is probably my favorite YA author writing today. I wonder what she will do when the Attolia books are finished... not that that's going to be any time soon :-P

Finally caught up with your thread! Good review of Bridget Jones' Diary.

Now my two cents on reading books that generally women may read. I wouldn’t be caught dead reading something like Bridget Jones' Diary or The Jane Austen Book Club. I’ve never seen the movies either. And Romance is my least favourite genre. But I’ve gladly read (and enjoyed) something like The Killer Inside Me or put Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? on my TBR pile. So there’s no saying what a man or a woman may or may not read. I’m just glad that we all get to read whatever we want to read and get to discuss them with our friends here at LT.

Generally, I wouldn't be caught dead reading something like Bridget Jones' Diary or The Jane Austen Book Club either. Darn school assignments!

Updates coming soon, I promise! Just posting now to mention that I won Arabella as part of Austenprose's Heyer giveaway! I actually already had this particular title, but as a ratty old large-print copy. So happy to get a lovely new SourceBooks edition!

Oooh, congratulations! I don't like large print books, somehow I can't get so 'into' them. What did you do to win it? Enter a draw, or submit a certain number of reviews?

And I'm looking forward to your updates, especially on The Woman in White.

Nathan's thread lives!

I won Charity Girl from the Austenprose giveaway, yay! (All we did was comment on the Heyer reviews that were posted during the month-long celebration... not a hard task!)

And yes, I cannot wait for your TWIW review. No pressure ;)

I got Cousin Kate! Not one of my favorites, but since I eventually want to replace all of my old 70s editions with the nice new ones, still much appreciated! Although I don't know that I will be able to part with my old ones, either, at least they won't be falling apart due to re-readings any more.

Glad to see new posts after a long, long time. Congrats on winning a brand new book! :-)

Further good news!

I had been wondering what to do with my extra copy of Arabella. Upon visiting my old college this weekend, I found out that a friend up there had read a single Heyer about a year back (she couldn't remember which one) and is planning to go on a binge pretty soon. She's going to get a package in the mail pretty soon, too!

Updates coming soon, I promise.

Updates post #1!

Since I last made a "big post" in here, I've read/finished the following books (my two most recent reads not listed for reasons that will shortly become clear):

• The Princess and the Goblin and The Princess and Curdie by George MacDonald—I loved MacDonald as a kid, almost as much as I loved Tolkien and Lewis, with the first of this series being my favorite of his work. I don't think I love him anymore. Parts of these books are beautiful, the opening chapters of The Princess and Curdie especially, but the preachiness really gets to me. One could argue that this really isn't that different from Lewis, but I've always been able to enjoy The Chronicles of Narnia simply as stories, something that I had trouble doing during this reread of the Curdie books. Could possibly be a result of MacDonald's theological oddities. Reviews here and here. (Gotta admit, I'm rather proud of my painting analogy in the latter. :P )

• Pinky Pye by Eleanor Estes—my sister loved this, but I was a little disappointed by it. It's a kid's book, yes, but having a typewriting cat in a story that is otherwise true-to-life strikes me as a bit silly. Skip it and read Ginger Pye instead. More of my thoughts on Pinky here.

• Friday's Child by Georgette Heyer—yay for Heyer! At first I was a little uncertain about this one, which seemed a little long-winded and lacked propulsion, but it got better as it went along. By the end, I had fallen in love with the characters, and like it almost as much as I did Cotillion. The hero and heroine develop quite beautifully, but my favorite characters are Gil, George, and Ferdy, the latter of whose rhetorical style I tried to copy in parts of my review.

• Wildwood Dancing by Juliet Marillier—this was my introduction to Marillier, and I can certainly see myself loving some of her other books. This one? A little "meh." I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong, and made my way through it rapidly, but between the undeveloped villains, the overwrought feminism and other anachronistic bits of "political correctness," and the ending (why? why?), I can't say I'd read it again. A friend asked to borrow it once I was done, and I ended up just giving it to her. My review here.

And I've finally caught up on all my old reviews! Here they are:

• A Conspiracy of Kings (some spoilers for the previous books in this one)

• The Brontes Went to Woolworths (was rather surprised by the attention this one got; must've been the yummy quotes)

• Inkheart

• Briar Rose

• Scenes of Clerical Life (now, see, this was one I wanted to get more thumbs, mostly because I spent so much effort on it ... it felt like some kind of magnum opus of reviewing ... ah well)

• Song for the Basilisk (love McKillip!)

• Cold Comfort Farm (a lot of fun to write about, although now that I'm finished, of course, I keep seeing more and more similarities between it and Wuthering Heights ... )

• The Last Battle (rather a sad little review, but it's been a few months, and I wanted to tie up my Narnia reviews)

And now, I am pleased to announce a new epoch in the history of this thread. This fall, I'm Going Gothic (the best term I could come up with for this collection of books; if you think of a better, please pass it along). I will be reading the works of such authors as Wilkie Collins, Bram Stoker, and Edgar Allen Poe. I will wander the moors and heaths, explore old houses and abandoned fortifications, meet with ghostly visions. You can view the full list of books here.

There will, of course, be occasional interruptions in the form of school reads, read-alouds with my sister, and the young adult novels wisewoman has "assigned" me as part of our personal challenge (and, probably, Mockingjay—a friend loaned it to me the other day and I'm sure I shan't be able to resist for long). But for the most part I will be sticking to this theme. If any one would like to join me for one of the books, let me know!

I've already started off with The Woman in White and Wuthering Heights. The former proved to be a great start to the series of reads, the opening mirroring my current situation with "the long hot summer ... drawing to a close," and the woman in white slowly gliding into the frame as the first sighting of the strange and Gothic.

Wuthering Heights I did not love nearly as much as TWiW. I don't think it's a book one can love, but it's one I enjoyed reading and can see myself coming back to in ten years or so.

Reviews of both coming shortly.

I tried to correct an injustice, the paucity of thumbs up on your review of Scenes of Clerical Life, but it reduced the count; apparently I had already thumbed it up.

I can, then, recommend that other people read the review and, if they agree with me, thumb it up.

Robert

#151 Ah Gothic lit! Now you’re in my territory!

I’ve read five of the eight books on your list. Dracula and Wuthering Heights are among my all time favourites. The Woman in White and Great Expectations, I liked. The Historian was pretty good but a tad overdrawn. The only ones left are My Cousin Rachel (Have you already read Rebecca?), The Raven and Other Poems and Selected Short Stories of Edgar Allen Poe.

I’ve read a few of Poe’s stories like The Black Cat, The Cask of Amontillado, The Gold-Bug, The Murders in the Rue Morgue, The Purloined Letter and A Tale of the Ragged Mountains. The Black Cat and A Tale of the Ragged Mountains deeply disturbed me as a child. The Murders in the Rue Morgue slightly repulsed me as a teen. But The Cask of Amontillado is utterly macabre and so deliciously chilling! I loved it as an adult.

Anyway, it's a wonderful list you've got there. Hope you enjoy it! :-)

Oh and can you explain the inclusion of Great Expectations to the list? I didn’t know it was Gothic.

I enjoyed reading your reviews--thanks for posting them in such a user-friendly format!

With your love of good characters, how is it you have not read any Lois McMaster Bujold?

Thank you for dropping by, Mr. Durick! I wasn't aware that you'd been following my thread. :) By the way, I do think that is a bit of a bug of LT's—that it sometimes subtracts a thumb even when you haven't thumbed it before. It's happened to me a few times. Or it could be as you say, that you did thumb it before. I dunno. I try not to care too much about thumbs, but I do so want people to read my thoughts on Eliot, mostly because I love her so. Was thinking today that we really need a GE group here on LibraryThing....

Yes, Porua, I've read Rebecca before, although I probably should reread it. My memories of it are very fond indeed. "The Cask of Amontillado" was my first Poe story and probably one of my favorites of the few I've read, although I've also enjoyed "Morella" and "The Pit and the Pendulum." "The Black Cat"? Not so much.

Obviously I am not a great judge of Great Expectations, since I've yet to read the whole thing (just an abridged version when I was very young). Again, "Gothic" was the generic term I used to describe my collection; not everything is going to fit perfectly. But the whole atmosphere at Satis House seems Gothic to me.

You're welcome, roni! Believe it or not, I'd never even heard of Lois McMaster Bujold. The only Bujold I know is Genevieve. :P What does she write, why would I like her (aside from her great characters), and which of her books would you suggest starting with?

Lois writes both science fiction and fantasy. Her Vorkosigan series is character-driven space opera with lots of action and great depth. You would start with The Warrior's Apprentice, and move on from there. There are two books that take place earlier, Shards of Honor and Barrayar, which are the story of Miles' parents, but many people prefer starting first with Miles. Bujold doesn't do what you expect, and her characters become real people who grow and change, attracting a multitude of devotees.

Her best fantasies are The Curse of Chalion and Paladin of Souls and are also an excellent place to start. CoC is first, and then PoS follows it chronologically. Again, her characters are well-developed and her world-building is excellent.

You might want to read her award-winning (Hugo and Nebula) novella online at
http://www.baen.com/library/1011250002/1011250002___1.htm

It is included in the book Borders of Infinity and is early in Miles' history, occurring completely on Barrayar.

Vorkosigan Series

Dreamweaver's Dilemma in Dreamweaver's Dilemma (1996) DD
Falling Free (1988) FF
Shards of Honor (1986) SoH
Barrayar (1991)
The Warrior's Apprentice (1986) TWA
The Mountains of Mourning in Borders of Infinity (1989) tMoM
The Vor Game (1990) TVG
Cetaganda (1995)
Ethan of Athos (1986) EoA
Labyrinth in Borders of Infinity (1989)
The Borders of Infinity in Borders of Infinity (1987)
Brothers in Arms (1989) BiA
Linking sections of Borders of Infinity (1989) BoI
Mirror Dance (1994) MD
Memory (1996)
Komarr (1998)
A Civil Campaign (1999) ACC
Winterfair Gifts (2004) WG
Diplomatic Immunity (2002) DI
Cryoburn (2010)

Thanks! I'll look for Bujold in all my usual literary haunts. I'll probably start with the fantasy books and then make my way into the sci-fi—that would be the most comfortable transition for me. By the way, have you read McKillip's sci-fi yet? I read Fool's Run earlier this year and quite enjoyed it.

Yes, I got that one in hardback when it first came out--22 years ago. I think I have all of her books, except the one just coming out. I may have lost one or two. I do really enjoy her writing as well.

WHAT? Does she have a new book coming out? *goes to check up on this*

EDIT: I see she does. The Bards of Bone Plain, to be more specific. Pre-order, here I come! (At the least it will be going on my Christmas list. At the least. Boy howdy, am I excited!—if I weren't, I wouldn't use such an inane expression as "boy howdy." ;) )

Nathan, I LOVE your review of Cold Comfort Farm. And now I realise that probably the reason I had a meh reaction to the book was because I didn't know enough about the genre it's parodying.

Apart from Wuthering Heights, what good examples are there of the pastoral Gothic subgenre of which you speak?

Also, I agree with Robert that your Scenes of Clerical Life review is underappreciated by the wider society of LT. I'm just going over to pimp it.

Well, a lot of Hardy fits in there. But I think that Gibbons was mostly parodying contemporary authors who are now forgotten; she was editing one of Mary Webb's novels for newspaper serialization at the time, and found it absolutely excruciating.

The large agonised faces in Mary Webb's book annoyed me ... I did not believe people were any more despairing in Herefordshire {sic} than in Camden Town.

agggh ... silly LT ... can't use square brackets!

Also, missed this at first, but thanks for the pimpage. Part of me misses Le Salon, but I can't do everything, and they never read anything I'm interested in anymore....

*wishlists the new McKillip book*

It's nice to see you back in your thread, Nathan. Of course I couldn't help but keep up with your reviews via profile comments during your thread hiatus :D

I love the idea of a Gothic fall! It makes me want to curl up and watch Jane Eyre on a rainy Sunday with a fire in the fireplace and something warm and bubbly in the crockpot. Just like last year...

And yay for the novels wisewoman assigned you :). Which reminds me, I need to read Ginger Pye. I've read the Winthrop books; was that all of them? For some reason I'm thinking there were four titles.

The last was The Railway Children. You assigned me four too: Ronia, The Pushcart War, The Silver Crown, and The Borrowers.

Yeah, I'm thinking of tossing a Jane Eyre reread in if I get through the rest of my Gothics before the semester is over. Of course, I might feel like moving on by then instead.

Just wrote a short review of The Theban Plays, which I finished for school today.

http://www.librarything.com/work/2151/reviews/63490941

Lovely review of Cold Comfort Farm! I heard it being read some 8-9 years ago on the BBC radio and thought it was wonderful. So glad you liked it too.

I'm on a bit of a break from my Gothic reads right now. I read Mockingjay over the past couple of days. As with the first two books, I absolutely FLEW through it, but as in Catching Fire I went away feeling more than a bit disappointed. She killed off so many characters, and there didn't seem to be any reason for it. Of course, the fact that there was no reason may very well be the point. And I'm sorry, but I really dislike all the lovelorn teenage dramas in these books. The first is definitely the best.

And now what do you know, but that my brand-spanking new copy of Arabella arrived in the mail today. I can't resist. As soon as I find a spare moment, I'm sure I'll be picking it up.

I will get back to Dracula and the rest eventually. And hopefully I'll post some reviews this weekend.

Ooh, that means that my copy of Cousin Kate is on its way to California, if yours made it to Texas today! Yippee!

And Charity Girl came for me yesterday :D

Cousin Kate arrived today. It is so beautiful!!!

I've been doing a terrible job of keeping up with this thread. And of writing my reviews. In my defense, I'm a busy college student who is also trying to write and submit short stories during "free time." *headdesk* Priorities, priorities. Here's a short overview of what I've been up to, reading-wise (hopefully full-length reviews for some of these, as well as The Woman in White and Wuthering Heights, will follow later):

Mockingjay—overall, a bit of a disappointment, I think. This series really went downhill as it went along. The last installment isn't bad per se, but I wasn't a huge fan of where Collins took the story. All my favorite characters either died or turned bad. Not cool.

# Arabella—not my favorite Heyer, but a fun romp, and a charming heroine. In fact, Arabella herself may just be my favorite Heyeroine of the few I've encountered. I love the scenes with her family, and the fact that her background as a parson's daughter makes her more morally grounded than Heyer's usual leading lady. And yet she is impetuous too. I could say more, but I'll save it for the review.

# Invitation to Camelot—this was an impromptu reread, and a delightful one at that. I enjoyed this anthology when I first encountered it; now I love it. It really gets to the heart of what the Arthurian legend is all about. One of my favorite short story collections. Full review here.

# A Midsummer Night's Dream—another reread, this one for my theater class. Shakespeare is almost always a win with me, although I've encountered this one often enough that it's begun to get a bit old.

# Ronia, the Robber's Daughter—the first of several YA books wisewoman/Amy "assigned" to me. I really enjoyed this one. The language is really poetic in its economy, the story is tinged with shades of both dark and light, and the characters are real. This is one I'll be keeping for my children.

# Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street—see review. I would never have read this on my own, but it was assigned for theater class, and reminded me how much I like the musical.

# Fences—my final assignment for theater class (maybe now I'll have time to review?). This was a little hard to get into, but it's a play of rare intensity and poetic expression. Recommended.

In other news, I've been receiving quite a few Early Reviewer books recently—an audiobook of Turgenev's Mumu, for instance, Brenda Maddox's George Eliot in Love, and a Christian nonfiction work, Shattered Dreams. When am I going to get to all of this stuff??? And yet I keep requesting. This month I'm hoping for the new Orson Scott Card offering or the Wodehouse collection. :P

At the moment I'm in the middle of Dracula, and I'm sorry to disappoint you, Porua, but I'm really really disliking it. Stoker's prose is incredibly dry, and his characters have no depth whatsoever—they're pretty much carbon copies of each other. The first section (in Transylvania) was quite good, the second (dealing with Lucy's decline) creeped me out, but now I'm just bored. Not even sure I'm going to finish it. When it comes to this sort of thing, I much prefer Collins, Stevenson, and Leroux.

I'm so glad you liked Ronia, Nathan! That reminds me, I need to read Ginger Pye.

And I just got that same beauteous edition of Arabella from BookMooch. "Heyeroine"... I like it! :). I'm looking forward to the review, whenever you get around to it.

And heh, I know exactly what you mean about not being able to stop requesting Early Reviewer books. Oh yes.

I know what you mean about Dracula - the female characters are rather offensive too - doesn't one character have "a woman's heart and a man's brain"? But all the same, I enjoyed it when I read it. Within its time and place and genre, it's got great settings and ideas, and the final chase was fun.

Yeah, that's Mina. She's sort of like Marian in The Woman in White ... except not quite as strong and much less interesting. But in those days it seems that a strong, intellectual woman was always thought of as somewhat masculine.

Ooh...added Invitation to Camelot to my wishlist.

I struggled with Dracula as well. While I think there were interesting aspects, Mina made me want to throw the book across the room regularly.

I hope you enjoy it! It's wonderful. I've already loaned it out to a friend. As I mentioned in my review, there is some content that would possibly qualify as objectionable, and of course not all the stories are as good as the very best of them, but overall it's a great collection and one that continually grows in my estimation.

When she was first introduced I quite admired Mina, and she's certainly a much stronger character than Lucy (ugh), but yeah ... it's gotten to the point where even the characters I liked initially are now annoying me. Not a favorite.

Finished Dracula. The ending was satisfying, at least. Still, very little between the two covers did much for me. Not a favorite. Now on to My Cousin Rachel.

As it turns out, I enjoyed My Cousin Rachel very, very much, and hope to have a review of it, and the other books I've finished recently, out soon.

Meanwhile, invective spilleth forth in the one review I have written recently, for the Early Reviewers book Time Among the Dead, which I absolutely despised. EDIT: Now with addendum! :P

So, what did everyone get for Christmas?

I received:

# To Kill a Mockingbird—the fiftieth anniversary edition, a beautiful hardback that will keep me from having to borrow my parent's ratty paperback all the time

# A Lost Lady by Willa Cather—a first edition, I think, with pictures from a silent movie that seems to have come out the same year as the book

# The Name Above the Title—an autobiography of Frank Capra that I got out of my school library last year, and had really enjoyed

Hopefully more updates (and reviews!) will appear in here soon.

Oh! and I also got a new car radio, which I hope will mean that I will be able to work some more audiobooks into my reading diet as well.

Way to go--great books!

Wow, I've been intimidated by the huge number of messages in this thread, but I finally caught up. I loved reading your thoughts on Austen, and I hope you're joining us again in Club Read 2011.

Nice Christmas presents! I didn't receive any books this year. My husband refuses to buy them for me and my mom gave practical gifts this year (which was perfectly fine! I needed a new mixer). But my husband did give me an iPod Shuffle, which means I can listen to more audiobooks (sometimes they won't play in my car's ancient CD player). So yay for that :)

Really, Fanny? I feel it's a very short thread compared to some of the others this year, mostly because I go through long periods when I don't post.

I will certainly be joining everyone for 2011, and will post a link here when I create a new thread, but that probably won't be until I catch up on my reviews, or finish my first 2011 read (whichever one comes first).

>185 ncgraham:, I am really bad at keeping up with other's threads on LT, so sometimes I only get to a thread when it's already got hundreds of messages, which feels really intimidating to jump into. In any event, I'm glad you're back for 2011!

I haven't quite finished closing up shop around here—there are still a few 2010 reads to review, a few more posts to make, favorites to select, etc. But I wanted to let you know that I've gone ahead and opened a 2011 thread here:

http://www.librarything.com/topic/109088